I say no, just as I said no back when Bush was so obviously planning to attack Iraq while claiming that he had no plans on the table for that. I knew that it would be a huge mistake . . . and I was correct. But then again Tonkin Gulf was a mistake on LBJ's part and don't even get me started on The Bay of Pigs and JFK. The important thing about mistakes is to learn from them so as not to repeat them or a variation of them in the future . . . and yet here we go again with an ISIL war involvement without -- as a nation -- thinking any of it through. I suspect that were there a military draft (Even if the draftees were not going to be sent into a war zone) then that would definitely make the average citizen BEGIN the process of thinking.
I wouldn't vote to invade Lichtenstein or Monaco with Barack Obama in charge. He reminds me of another dictator who constantly over-ruled his generals and invaded Russia and refused to commit his tank forces on D-Day. It's tough being a genius who knows better than the professionals, on everything.
Bill Clinton had the right idea! Keep Saddam bottled up in Iraq, while denying him even the use of his own airspace. Saddam, with all his faults, was good for one thing -- keeping Islamo-Nazis subdued. Any time these radical, militant religious factions started getting unruly, Saddam smashed them down every time. He would have had his Republican Guard military force destroy ISIS before it ever fully hatched from the snake's egg it crawled out of.... I said at the time we invaded, way back in 2003, "Well, we'd damned well BETTER find 'weapons-of-mass-destruction', or there will be pure hell to pay!" We didn't find any, but instead got bogged down in "nation-building", blowing hundreds of billions of dollars we didn't have, and all the other Federal Government horse**** that "W" Bush probably wishes he'd never gotten us involved in. You know the most ironic part? We didn't even demand getting any of the plentiful Iraqi oil in payment for liberating those bastards, and they sure as hell didn't offer to give us any, either.... All in all, it was the worst mistake since Vietnam, and Vietnam was only worse because it got 60,000 American military personnel killed instead of about 4,500 in Iraq. A government spin-artist of either political party would tell us next that this means a great improvement!
Hell no. Read the Downing Street Memo which proves Bush lied and committed TREASON which has cost us over a trillion dollars, given billions in profit to wealthy elites, and caused tremendous deaths and instability in the Middle East.
I agree 100%. We need to stop this constant sticking our nose into every pissing contest and cat fight on the planet. It is not our mission to force our democracy on the world. It is our mission to protect our democracy in our country. We need a highly effective defensive military to protect our country. Then we inform the World to not even consider screwing around in our part of the World and if they don't get the message send them a picture of Hiroshima on the day after. If we didn't spend the money we spend on other countries problems we could fix some of our problems like health care and poverty. Let the Euro-trash take care of themselves for the next 100 years.
Don't you know? Before Barack Obama, The United States of America was the Garden of Eden. Immaculate in every sense. Without sin. Without fault. All evil in our nation, and in the world, for that matter, can be traced to Obama. Don't believe me, just ask BVWC! - - - Updated - - - I'm guessing you've never worn the uniform.
Until we get a commander in chief that DOESN'T change the rules of engagement to put our soldiers in more danger, we have no business invading anyone. EDIT, sorry wasn't responding to you.
I knew it would be worth it knowing what I knew THEN. Anybody who couldn't see that eliminating Saddam would turn that country into a hellhole isn't worth the toilet paper clinging to his arse. Either that or he was a neocon with an alternate agenda, still with the toilet paper problem.
It's not the ISIL thing so much as we still have active plans to invade Iran. And we have the propaganda to go with those plans, lacking only the sellable pretext for the moment. We haven't learned a single thing.
The petro dollar must be worth it any cost of life. Why do you think we helped overthrow Gaddiffi and Saddam and now Assad? For the petro dollar. There is no other reason. So if Obama tells me Assad must die for the petro dollar then so be it. Who am I to question out beloved leader and savior Obama.
While I definitely voted no and hell no twice, one thing should be remembered and that is the picture of crowds pulling down Saddam's statue and stomping his pictures shortly after we invaded. Had we let the remnant of Saddam's Ba'ath, who are still in power in Syria, reconstruct a democratic government under our guidance, as they were perfectly willing to do, all of this could have been avoided. Bush and the Neocons truly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by trying to impose Americanism on the oldest government there is.
Yes it was well worth it. Many, many, many Islamo-Nazis have been killed and this has made the world a safer place. God bless USA and Israel.
Despite the $3,000,000,000,000 expense and the loss of 6000+ GIs, Iraq has been total VICTORY for the neoconservatives. They got what they wanted (Saddam isn't sending any more checks to mothers of suicide bomber in Israel) and they've stayed out of prison.
And that was dealt with...then some retardo decided his daddy did it so he would do it too, and now we have isis, thank you for that usa...
What's worse than enslaved by muslim dictators? ...being rescued by americans... the estimates for civilian deaths in gulf war 2 range from a low 100k to 1 million, well done usa, well done...
No, they lost their credibility and most of their influence in diplomacy with it. The Bank bailout would have been a minor expense if the US was not already bankrupt from the war.