Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rbg81
Saddam wasn’t even close to developing nuclear weapons. Iran is.

I don't support Iran getting the bomb. If I had been in charge, I would have given them a set time to stop their program or I would have ordered it taken out by air strikes.

As for Iraq, nearly everyone was convinced Hussein had a nuclear weapons program. He shot his mouth off. Wouldn't allow inspectors in. Those inspectors, the U. N., Europe, the U. S. (including the Democrats) were convinced Hussein as working on Nukes.

Mr. Big Mouth was his own worst enemy. Slink back into your nation, live our your life, don't cause trouble.

He couldn't do it. After 09/11, he was a natural.

Iran and ISIS effectively control Iraq.

ISIS has made inroads, but I don't buy the Iran rules Iraq line.

It would have been nice if Saddam were replaced by a peaceful, democratic Iraq aligned with American. But despite our best efforts, treasure and lives, that is not the case. And it probably never would have been. A Saddam controlled Iraq would have still been a bulkhead against Iran.

The Hussein controlled Iraq was breaking the no fly zones all the time. He was moving his troupes up to his borders with other nations. He was locking on our surveylance aircraft.

When we left Iraq, it was in decent shape. Waring factions had quieted down, and the people of Iraq were self-governing and living in relative peace.

Obama pulled the last of our forces out, and that left a vacuum. Here we are today, all due to him.

Afghanistan is likewise turning to crap. Again, despite all our efforts, I’ll bet the Government falls within one year after we leave. Would not be surprised if Russia went back in there to pick up the pieces

May be.

116 posted on 10/04/2015 2:14:26 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (It's beginning to look like "Morning in America" again. Comment on YouTube under Trump Free Ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne
I don't support Iran getting the bomb.

One of the side effects of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is that we wound up with sizable forces and bases on all sides of Iran. Even Azerbaijan had an arrangement with us for us to use their bases.

When certain politicians say that "under no circumstances" will Iran be allowed to have a nuke, I hope they understand what it is they are saying. I think most of us understand what that means. And if that comes to be the case, then for us to be in control on four sides of Iran would have been pretty important. Unfortunately, we've thrown away the strategic advantage we had and got nothing in return.

131 posted on 10/04/2015 3:32:09 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
"He couldn't do it. After 09/11, he was a natural."

After 9/11 we had to go to war with somebody.

I'm not being facetious or sarcastic.

It was imperative for the nation.

But, it should have been Iran.

144 posted on 10/04/2015 4:28:35 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson