Looking back at it now, with all the hind site available to us, containing Saddam Hussain would probably have been a better policy rather than removal.
I supported the removal of Saddam Hussain at the time, because, in light of 9/11, in light of Saddam’s support for terrorist organizations, in light of his possible WMD capabilities, and in light of all his violations of the Gulf War treaty, if anyone deserved to be removed from power, it was him.
It seemed after Saddam’s removal, Bush thought that the Iraqi people would embrace freedom and democracy after having been the victims of tyranny for so many years. That was a fatal assumption. As we all know now, the “nation building” idea was a big mistake by GWB.
The problem is obvious to all of us - the Islamic worldview. It’s the elephant in the room that none of our political leaders seem willing to consistently identify.
The world view of Islam is not based on the value of the individual soul or life as Christianity is. Christianity says love not only your neighbor, but also even your enemy. Islam insists that the entire world serve Allah. Refusal means death.
And, as you pointed out Attention Surplus, throw in the variety of Islamic sects, and even among Muslims there is no real unity.
Our Judeo-Christian worldview of the value of the individual, of justice, personal property rights, freedom and liberty of the individual, and more importantly, true tolerance of others you disagree with, and in which conflicts are settled by the rule of law - none of this is seen in Islamic nations (except to a degree in ‘secular’ Islamic nations).
As terrible as Saddam’s secular rule was, it looks as though only through sheer tyranny does an Islamic nation enjoy any sense of “unity”. At least the Christians were not being exterminated by Saddam.
It’s Islam that is never going to truly allow a democratic republic because there is no such thing as tolerance under Islam.
At the time we didn’t know there could be someone out there worse than Saddam. Turns out he was FAR from the worst.
Completely agree. I was willing to entertain the idea of invading Iraq at the time. I was neither violently opposed nor wildly enthusiastic. Win, lose, or draw, I strongly suspected it would be a decade-long effort at minimum, and who the hell needed that?
It was debated at nauseating length, for sure. Whether it was justified based on WMDs, perhaps these recent finds of neuro-weapons justified the invasion....somewhat. Going to war is the sh**ts, there’s no way around that.
It was, as I said, sort of a science-fair project, unfortunately involving thousands of deaths of our guys (inevitable) and many more Iraqi deaths.
We are in this greasy position of having many of the people in these countries, particularly Iran, actually liking the US or at least indifferent to us....but the anything-but-secular leadership needs us to be the Great Satan.
In the end, our relationship(s) with these countries involves bridging a thousand year gap in cultural development, to use a highfallutin’ phrase. I don’t think it’s a practical possibility. When all our positive efforts can be thwarted by one crazed or freaked out soldier killing a dozen villagers or putting some underwear on some prisoners’ heads, we cannot win. And I don’t think we can not not lose either.
“Looking back at it now, with all the hind site available to us, containing Saddam Hussain would probably have been a better policy rather than removal.”
It always was the best choice.
There were no Iraqis involved in 9-11. There no Iraqis known to have belonged to any of the active terrorist cells. Saddam’s support for terrorism was marginal at best, mostly donating some money.
His WMDs consisted of poison gas in artillery shells. It was a threat to the Kurds or the Iranians, but not to anyone outside of cannon range.
Bush 41 was a realist who wasn’t interested in knocking off Saddam. In contrast Dubya appears to have believed in the messianic power of democracy, so naturally he thought it was A Good Idea to knock off the Iraqi dictator; then peace, happiness, unicorns and rainbows would come to the Middle East.