Honestly, it amazing to watch you spin things.
The war was not kicked off by the Saudis. The war was kicked off by Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait.
The U. S. vowed not to let that stand and reversed the taking of Kuwait.
You forgot Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Al Fatah... if you’re going to toss out condemnations naming any groups you can come up with, please let me help you.
How many Wasabi Muslims live in Afghanistan today?
Nonsense.
Iraq’s GDP is way down, but the people of Iraq were not getting the benefit of all of Iran’s money before. The figures are cooked up by agencies around the world who were never in favor of the U. S. going into Iraq, and just aren’t going to give up until they have turned victory into defeat.
Total bull s—t.
Democrats are great for doing stuff like this. Now we even have idiots on our own side twisting things as badly as they can to make it look like the U. S. was evil to remove Hussein.
I have listed most of the things Hussein did to his people, the people in the region, the nations in his region. The man is responsible for the deaths of over half a million people, but here you are making the case Iraq was better off under him.
How about the hundreds of thousands of son abducted and forced into the armed services to fulfill his idiotic dreams of conquest? How about the people lined up in front of ditches and shot? How about the women abducted by his sons? What about the people in his nation who suffered while he built himself palace after palace.
How about all the people with smiling faces, thrilled to be able to vote for the first times in their lives?
Today Iraq’s leadership is not committing mass murder. It isn’t threatening it’s neighbors. Hundreds of thousands have not died due to it’s leadership over the time since it took over from Hussein.
It did not create al Qaeda. It did not create ISIS. It did not send it’s military leaders into foreign nations to attack their embassies or kill the staff in them.
Iraq may not be perfect today, but it is exponentially better than it was, for it’s own people, and people and nations around it. If you wish to take the Leftist arguing points and pound them home here, go ahead. You lose.
As for Christians in Iraq, it is true that they have come under persecution. That does not mean that nothing was gained by taking out Iraq’s leadership.
I don’t like Christian persecution, or seeing them flee any nation. Under Hussein, all the citizens of Iraq were subject to persecution. Hussein’s home town may have been the exception, but I’ll bet anyone having family elsewhere who didn’t like Hussein, didn’t fare very well.
Today we see different sects of Islamic people’s come under discrimination there.
Is this unusual in the region? Look at Iran. Look at Libya. The whole region is a festering cauldron of hate and persecution of one sect or another.
You’ll probably never have conventional peace like the West, but at least Iraq is not invading it’s neighbors. It’s leadership is not killing hundreds of thousands on a whim.
ISIS in the north of Iraq was the most vicious attacker against Christians in that region.
That group was armed and funded by the U. S., when it tried to give it to the “good” al Qaeda, thanks to Obama, Clinton, McCain, Graham, and Rubio.
Blaming all that on our removal of Hussein is just lazy. We enabled the most vicious attackers of Christians in Iraq, because Obama was not a friend of Christians, and not grasping more than a third grader’s understanding of the region, he actually attempted to arm our enemies.
Al Q and Al Fatah are Saudi created Wahabbi groups.
The Muslims Brotherhood are Wahabbi-ish, but not Saudi.
Hizb’allah are Shia and Irani sponsored, correct - and when have you seen them carry out any jihadi attack outside the middle east?
you listed the things Hussein did to his people - that’s not much worse than any other Arab ruler - and nothings happened to them.
The Gulf War one did cause Al Q to focus on attacking the USA because “infidel troops were based on the holy soil of Arabia”