[alloysteel]

Yeah, but how about Iraq, Iraq wasn't safer with Saddam in charge. Nobody gets grabbed off the streets and thrown into woodchippers feet first any more. The rape rooms have been closed down.

The US did not go into Iraq to make America safer. The difference it made to our internal security was minute and extremely marginal at best. We went to Iraq to enforce the letter of the various UN resolutions which had been passed, and on the basis of intelligence which Jay Rockefeller himself had concluded meant that Iraq was within five years or so of producting an atomic weapon. That weapon would never have threatened any American city, but Tel Aviv and Teheran were both in great danger once such a device was operational.

[qman]

We went to Iraq to have Iran surrounded on three sides. west Afganistan:
north Turkey:
east Iraq:

While turkey has few if any american troops, they are now member of Nato and are plegged to defend Nato.

Afganistan has 20 thousand american troops that can be turned west if nessessary. We also have bases there now that can be supplied with more troops if need be.

Iraq has 150 thousand troops, and bases available to launch an assault on Iran.

Turkey should hold the line, but wont actively oppose us.

I am not suggesting that we will launch an attack on Iran with troops. That does not seem to be in the cards now. But clearly Iran is the main problem today!

The next country to come under attack will likely be Saudi Arabia. Those that can take their oil off the market will hurt world markets and destroy economies all over the world.

If we were'nt in Iraq we would have a hard time reacting to such an eventuality.