Devastation
Jan 9 2006, 06:59 PM
Face it. The whole reason why we went to Iraq, was to restore order that Sadam Hussein had caused when he wanted to revolutionize his country and "his" world (so he says) and the devastating blow that the terrorists had made on our proud country. The restoratation involves time, a completely new democracy (a replica of ours) and bloodshed. If this is the means to restore the middleast, then so be it. I am a Proud Republican. The decision made for this restoration in my opinion was the best decision that our President could of made. Although I thought that the restoration would have shown faster progress by now, i still support his efforts in Iraq but, just how long does he plan on re-supplying more troops and finally overcome the mass chaos? The voting
for parlimentary elections is now over. that also brought chaos along with the anxiousness of the world around it.
What will happen to Iraq?
mipadi
Jan 9 2006, 07:48 PM
QUOTE(Devastation @ Jan 9 2006, 6:59 PM)
Face it. The whole reason why we went to Iraq, was to restore order that Sadam Hussein had caused when he wanted to revolutionize his country and "his" world (so he says) and the devastating blow that the terrorists had made on our proud country.
I thought it was to get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.
illumineering
Jan 9 2006, 09:16 PM
Both North Korea and Pakistan pose greather threats to the US as their WMD programs have far greater stockpiles. We haven't invaded either country.
The insertion of a US backed regime will not minimize the threat of terrorism. The intent of Islamic extremeists is to overthrow any government in the republic that does not support a fundamentalist version of Islam. Additionally, there was never any hard evidence to support a US sponsored overthrow of Saddam Hussein would curb terrorism.
Past US relations with Hussein do not support the belief in the value of democracy in Iraq. During the 1980's, under Reagan, Rumsfeld and Cheney supported Hussein as we considered Iran the greatest threat in the region. Rumsfeld traveled to Iraq in 1983 as a special representative of Reagan. Additionally, they received billions of dollars in aid as they were viewed as a nation that did not support terrorists.
The war in Iraq gives the US the ability to control 2/3 of the world's oil reserve. This is critical as OPEC is considering the use of the euro for its oil transactions instead of the dollar.
kryogenix
Jan 9 2006, 09:18 PM
Pakistan is cooperating with the US in the war on terror, why invade them? We're still talking with NK, why should we invade them?
illumineering
Jan 10 2006, 12:16 AM
QUOTE(kryogenix @ Jan 9 2006, 10:18 PM)
Pakistan is cooperating with the US in the war on terror, why invade them? We're still talking with NK, why should we invade them?
I never suggested we should. My point was to illuminate the fact that they are in the same position Iraq was in the 80's.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.