War

[strredwolf]

I didn't watch our (since I'm a US native) blathering President "Dubba" Bush set the nation on a path to remove Saddam Hussein. The news reports were ready with leaked press reports and whatnot.

Afterwards, one check later and the nation's back at code orange and there's a 48 hour deadline for Saddam to get out... and he's not leaving.

My question is: Shouldn't he have left twelve years ago?

Lets take a look. We (the UN) left the government of Iraq to their own devices for twelve years, and now we're going back to throughly clean up the mess we left behind. If you remember your history, you'll see a similarity -- the first two world wars. WW I we (then the League of Nations) left Germany's existing government to it's own devices, saying "You pay reparations." Then, WW II, THEY BIT US AGAIN!!! And guess what, we delayed until it was just plain obvious that we needed to go to war.

We're doing it all over again. Instead, we're only slightly smarter in which we're seeing the resistance and we're not giving as much.

I don't like it. We should of did it the first time like we did with Aftganistan. Now it's Iraq, and I won't be suprized if Iran and North Korea start joining forces.

Comments

[nekomimikun.livejournal.com]

Well, I think the main reason we didn't finish it the first time was a "Vietnam Syndrome" prevalent during that time and even now. It would have been political suicide to do that then. And even now it is. Bush Sr. could have finished the war if he wanted, but there was no support, especially from the Democrats, who (as we all know) beat out Bush Sr. in the later election because of that.
I think we should get rid of the crazy bastard. He's had no scruples murdering half his family, or gassing his own people, he needs to stop.