The thing that makes the Iraq war different is that Saddam Hussein had perpetrated an act of war on American soil with massive loss of life and property with the participation of Iraqi intelligence officers in the Oklahoma City bombing.
Although I had always thought there was an Islamic component to Oklahoma City, it had not been my understanding Hussein was involved. That doesn’t mean it’s not true. It just means I hadn’t heard of it.
If true, I agree that’s a whole new ball game.
I do believe the U. S. had a vested interest in calming Iraq down. I believe it does in calming Iran down too.
In the overall scheme of things, we have to figure out if we want to encourage other nations to develop WMDs and standing armies because we are no longer going to be involved globally.
I submit going down that road lessens our stature globally. It enhances the stature of the nation that comes along and replaces us. It increases the threat against our nation, and it ensures that future hostilities will take place on our soil, perhaps in the very town where people are demanding we quit getting involved in everything.
Should we be involved in Syria or Libya? As long as they are somewhat stable and not declaring war on their neighbors, even though I think Syria is quite problematic, we should stay out unless we have to go in.
We didn’t have to go in there or in Libya. We were being asked to support terrorists or the then current leadership. It was a no-win.
Thank you for the mention Carry_Okie.
Where did you hear this? Why do you think it was kept quiet?