political note

[anotheranon]

Well, duh! (similar stuff here). I will concede that maybe in this case Wolfowitz might have been taken out of context, but still, I think it demonstrates that the differences between dealing with N. Korea and Iraq depend at least in part on Iraq's oil fields.

What amazes me is that Wolfowitz says it aloud, because the war was supposed to be about Weapons of Mass Destruction (TM), right?

..Right??

Comments

Re:

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

Well, here's my take on it.

I do not think that the Iraq war was a good choice. While any humanitarian efforts are commendable and Saddam was certainly a bad guy, the U.S. simply could not afford the war, and the occupation (for that is what it is) is sucking even more and more money away. I am not convinced that the U.S. did much good over there apart from ousting Saddam. In addition, I question whether Iraq had/has biological/chemical weapons, and if they could have attacked the U.S. with them if they had.

I also think that this war drained $ and manpower from the search for the terrorists who actually attacked the U.S.

Having said this, once they were over there, I agree with you that the planning and preparation could have been better. I'm no military expert, but it seems like the troops were undersupplied and the ground assault wasn't well planned.

Now that we're there, it only makes sense that we should stay and clean up our mess, but I question whether the remaining troops are a capable peacekeeping force, and whether Iraqi democracy is really the U.S. government's aim.