AR Husker Fan
Team HuskerBoard
Just one point of correction - Saddam didn't provide a safe haven for the "extremists". As found by the 9/11 Commission (a bi-partisan commission) and other groups, Saddam actually wanted nothing to do with al Qaida or bin Laden. He viewed them as a potential threat to his rule. He didn't permit any terrorist training camps and he didn't either embrace or empower bin Laden. The "extremists" actually entered once Saddam's rule had fallen (which occurred almost immediately against our forces).Like you said bin laden was the driving force behind 9/11 not Bush as was stated above and that is what I was responding to. Now we went into Iraq on the premise that sadam had or was close to having WMD,s and with his history of using such weapons on his own people I feel we had no other choice. Do you remember all of the united nations sanctions that sadam broke and snubbed at the world. We stopped fighting the Iraqi army shortly after we arrived and are still fighting the extreamists that he provided a safe haven for.
Is war fun, hell no. Was it necessary HELL YES and for anyone to think there was a better way to deal with these people that are intent on destroying the safety of this region and in turn the world is in MY OPINION wrong, please enlighten us on how that could have been accomplished without coming over here and forcing sadam out of power.
I for one believe that the Iraqi people and the people of the entire region and world are better off without sadam.
Simply put, Bush started a war against a country that posed no threat to the US or US interests, using knowingly falsified information, and that resulted in actually strengthening al Quida in that region. In doing so, he diverted forces from Afghanistan, leaving it teetering on the brink of being taken over by al Quida. He did so without allowing the weapons inspectors complete their job and by ignoring their preliminary reports that indicated no WMDs and no chemical weapons stockpiles.
And from all indications from credible sources, he did this simply to "democratize" the Middle East - an idea that was not only bound to failure, but has failed under every attempt by every Western power for centuries.
Was Saddam a tyrant of the highest order? Yes, without doubt. But it doesn't justify placing our soldiers in harms way when it wasn't not only not necessary, but in fact strengthened our enemies.