Why didn’t President Bush sack that nation instead? It was clearly more dangerous to us and actually committed direct acts of war against us.
Yep—if Bush was so itching to go after a bigger fish than just Afghanistan, why not Iran? At least as much involvement and far more dangerous.
For a brief shining hour, freeing Iraq from Saddam proliferated the concept of freedom across the Middle East.
Iran was destabilised in a good way: there was an opportunity for the country to be liberated, with just a little help from the US.
But Obama betrayed them and consigned the freedom-fighters to toture, rape and death. Iranian freedom has been a distant dream since then.
But with Trump, who knows?
Low hanging fruit first. Iraq on one side, Afghanistan on the other.
The Bushes were of a NWO mind. They cared not that Hussein was the best friend that Christians and Jews had in the middle east. The plan was to say that Iraq had WMD which they didn’t. The chaos that was created by the Bilderbergers was given to Bush I and Bush II to carry out. It should have been called ‘Operation Middle east chaos.
Merkel and Obama then carried out their assignments.
Beyond our capabilities, frankly. Iran is much larger than Iraq and even with its air force and communications smashed would require a two million man occupation force to pacify.
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend”
Some in high places suggest that keeping Iraq in power would have kept Iran in check. Perhaps. But it is too late for a “should-have” and even then there was the loose cannon aspect of Saddam Hussain and a few other issues which were considered unacceptable (the Kurdish genocide for one).
And then there is the question of mid east oil dependence and our very own EPA restrictions. Idiocy, actually. Decades of incompetent U.S. leadership in high places and the penchant for globalism and the NWO which took the U.S. to the abyss.
I pray that at some point in the near future America will reach a point of realization just how close we came to demise by design from within.
>>Why didn’t President Bush sack that nation instead? It was clearly more dangerous to us and actually committed direct acts of war against us.
Iran is 4x the size and 2x the population as Iraq, so its tougher to occupy post war. And there were probably more Iranians willing to fight off an invasion by the Great Satan than there were Iraqis willing to stand up for Saddam Hussein.
Iran has the ability to shut down all transport through the Persian Gulf. During Bush’s presidency, that would have been nearly as destructive as nuclear weapons going off in theater.
It would be bad now but with non ME oil production up globally, it would probably only cause a world wide recession vs. depression.