[Prost1]

Hindsight is always 20/20, but in the case of Iraq it is 200/20. Contention - not enough troops. We did not go there to conquer. We went to remove a despotic threat. Mission Accomplished! WMD was not the primary criteria. Violation of 16 U.N. resolutions was the primary reason. Post 9/11, rogue, powerful nations cannot be tolerated. Contention, postwar admin mistakes. It was believed by ALL that the Iraqis would rejoice. If the tribalist did not come together, there was no reason to believe they would support insessant murder and terror. To turn the corner on Wahabists, the U.S. needed a pivot point. Iraq is a pivot point. Pivot points are important in foreign and military policy. Foreign policy is impotent without backup. Military power in Iraq provides backup. Also needed is financial strength. This is the area of greatest weakness and of highest priority (IMO).

[Osage Orange]

Hindsight is always 20/20, but in the case of Iraq it is 200/20.

Hindsight is generally much better than 20/20....something like 20/10 or 20/15.

BWDIK??

FRegards,

[A. Pole]

We went to remove a despotic threat. Mission Accomplished! WMD was not the primary criteria.

If "WMD was not the primary criteria" then what was this threat about? Was it worth 1000 lives of soldiers, 50,000 Iraqis and 100 billions of $$?

[The Wizard]

hand wringing......we did the right thing....next.....

[rwfromkansas]

"I believe that the real reason for the war, at least in the US, was to create a reasonably democratic, free-market Iraq to act as both a beacon and a rebuke to other countries in the region."

Duh.

But, that logic would not have been supported by the people, so they had to use something else.

Eventually, Iraq will serve as this beacon. It may take 3 years still, but it will get there.