Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
I see what you're saying and agree. It's an argument I've made before with others. But I don't see any other way to determine if we were successful there or not but to let them try and stand on their own.
|
But I mean, don't you think this is something that needed to be considered
before we went into Iraq in the first place?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Well, all I know is I don't buy into the crap about "war for oil" and other similar conspiracies. But maybe I'm not as educated on the situation as I think, so, please, enlighten me.
But I can't help but think that if 9/11 hadn't happened, we wouldn't be at war over there at all today.
|
No, we didn't go to Iraq for the oil. Yes, it was related to 9/11, but not because Saddam had anything to do with al-Qaeda. We basically went it to divide the Islamic world as a whole, and to put countries like Saudi Arabia in a position where they either had to be with us 100%, or not at all. And being pussies, they were drawn (involuntarily) closer to us, which meant that they could no longer get away with sponsoring jihadists.
It wasn't necessarily a bad idea in principle, but it was poorly planned and executed.