3750 TOW anti-tank missiles. Gee, I wonder who could have given him those? Let's see could it have been President Reagan? Yes it was and what's more Reagan had it right! It was more important to US national security to arm secularly led Iraq to fight a war against the Islamicist Ayatollah's of terrorist Iran. Such a wiser Reaganite policy would make a lot more sense in countering the greatest national security threats to the US if employed by Bush than the President's current militarily bone-headed policy of invading puny non-threat Iraq while promising Iran that the US will not attack them leaving Iran and Al Queda to pick up the pieces once Saddam is gone and Iraq has been Balkanized.
Yes, Reagan had it right ... nigh on twenty years ago.
Meanwhile, we've had a war with Iraq, they defied the terms of truce without response form the wimpy West (while Billy Jeff was more interested in f*llati* that foreign policy) and have since colluded with Al-Queda. Moreover, you quite wrongly presume there is nothing being done or in the works for Iran (or much of the Middle East, for that matter.
As for the 'Balkanization' of Iraq ... that is a laugher. I understand it's boundaries were actually drawn arbitrarily and with a ruler in the British Foreign & Commonwealth Office. Iraq is an unecessary construct of the post-Colonial era ... all the better it be carved up.
More to my original point, how's about that Iraq apolgist, Ritter?