On Oct 14, 1:12*pm, "SteveT" >
wrote:
> > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Oct 12, 1:23 pm, "SteveT" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> "MoPar Man" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >> > QX wrote:
>
> >> >> This country is going down the road to hell, and Mr. Obama is
> >> >> yelling full steam ahead all the way.
>
> >> > And Bush was different?
>
> >> > What did he do in 8 years, besides send thousands of US troops to their
> >> > death at a price of a trillion dollars and counting?
>
> >> You might as well ask, what did FDR and Truman do besides sending
> >> thousands
> >> of US troops to their death at a price of <whatever number of current
> >> dollar-equivalents was spent in the execution of WW II>)?
> > You really think WW II was the same? *Iraq was no threat to us,
> > period, and Bush either knew it or should have known it.
>
> * * First: I wasn't trying to equate them, I was simply trying to point out
> that the question, as asked, was not sufficient to make the point I believed
> the poster was intending to make. And I certainly think that WW II in Europe
> *was* similar. Germany and Italy were no direct threat to the US but our

When the US declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor, Germany declared
war on the US.


> allies were either overrun (happily avoided by allied intervention against
> Iraq by GHW Bush) or in danger of attack by mad despots who were killling
> and/ or imprisoning thousands or millions of their own people. World powers
> don't necessarily react only to direct threats to themselves (which is the
> point of organizations like NATO, although NATO itself is not otherwise
> relevant to my point). And, still, your blanket statement that Iraq under
> Hussein was not a threat to the US is not universally accepted

So what was the threat


>(WMD and the
> possibility of their falling into the hands of terrorists,

But there was no clear evidence Saddam had WMD (all the evidence he
didn't was dismissed) and the inspectors were there doing their job.


>Iraqi
> interference with US attempts to verify and enforce the conditions that
> ended the first Gulf war).

Meaning they didn't take kindly to being denied 2/3 of their country's
airspace?

>
> >> But I expect
> >> everyone gets your point, you believe it was a waste. Millions of
> >> now-free-from-Ba'ath-domination Iraqis, Iranians and Kuwaitis threatened
> >> by
> >> their formerly bellicode neighbor and Israelis would almost certainly
> >> disagree with you.
> > Yet poll after poll shows the Iraqis resent our presence there and
> > want us out.
> > <snip>
>
> * * Sure, now that the real work, getting rid of the Ba'athists, is done.

And with it, the ones who knew how to make a gov't work and who knew
how to make a military work; then we had 5+ years of Amateur Hour.


> Many knowledgeable Iraqis who do not viscerally oppose allied presence just
> because we are us and who understand the current state of Iraqi readiness to
> defend itself and its people are happy we're there.

Polls say it's a tiny number. You might also note Iraq has lost a
huge portion of its population since we invaded to people simply
leaving.


>As are a significant
> number of Kuwaitis, Israelis and no doubt other members of the governments,
> militaries and general population of Iraq's neighbors.

Oh great, 4000 American lives and a trillion dollars so the royal
family of Kuwait can be happy. The country where women cannot vote or
drive.


>
> > Now the threat is Iran (which Iraq held in check) and terrorists
> > recruited by American actions in Iraq.
>
> * * Terrorists existed and were acting against Americans and allies well
> before we were embroiled in Iraq.

Iraq was a great recruiting ground.


>And I disagree with the notion that the US
> should necessarily ignore the evils of one despot to hold another in check,

So I assume you advocate invading North Korea, China, Russia, Somalia,
Sudan, ...


> that is just one more element to include among those bearing on the
> decision. Also, you forgot to mention Afghanistan; I assume you deliberately
> excluded North Korea because of geography. <grin>