If <insert your candidate> had been President during and after 9/11...

[Marx]

Again, we're talking about the 'totality' of bad news coming from Iraq just after 9/11:

- Possible WMDs. Everyone believed it. Saddam was telling his own military they had them.
- Threatening US aircraft that had every right to be in his 'airspace' due to the UN resolutions.
- Paying terrorists 25k to successfully bomb and kill Palestinians.
- Refusing to cooperate with weapons inspectors.

Perhaps I'm just being an idealist, but I tend to think that the politicians on board with going into Iraq back in those days were making the 'right' decision based on the circumstances. I agree that he's never been the 'right' guy for the job as President, but I just don't see all of this 'malicious' intent that others do.

For me, the problem was never 'why' we went into Iraq. I understood that, and despite how much 'backpeddling' has happened since then by 50% of the politicians in favor it at the time, I still believe most politicians made the decision not because of 'popularity', but because given the attack we'd just experienced, the number of lives we'd just lost, it would have been irresponsible NOT to go into Iraq.

However, I certainly agree with everyone else on how poorly it was managed after that point.

And I'm still not getting this whole 'personal agenda' thing people are attributing to Bush. There's no evidence whatsoever. Personally, I think the man is too simple-minded to be as manipulative as he'd need to be in order to pull something like this off without 'cause'.

I just do not believe that anyone else would have waged a full scale war on Iraq. That being said, a US-supported military coup from within the country could very well have been in the cards. It's become pretty well circulated that Bush wanted a connection between Iraq and 9/11, but there wasn't one.

Regardless of that, no other candidate would have abandoned major operations in Afghanistan without completing the purpose for going in in the first place - capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden.

 

[bell110]

Again, we're talking about the 'totality' of bad news coming from Iraq just after 9/11:

- Possible WMDs. Everyone believed it. Saddam was telling his own military they had them.
- Threatening US aircraft that had every right to be in his 'airspace' due to the UN resolutions.
- Paying terrorists 25k to successfully bomb and kill Palestinians.
- Refusing to cooperate with weapons inspectors.

Perhaps I'm just being an idealist, but I tend to think that the politicians on board with going into Iraq back in those days were making the 'right' decision based on the circumstances. I agree that he's never been the 'right' guy for the job as President, but I just don't see all of this 'malicious' intent that others do.

For me, the problem was never 'why' we went into Iraq. I understood that, and despite how much 'backpeddling' has happened since then by 50% of the politicians in favor it at the time, I still believe most politicians made the decision not because of 'popularity', but because given the attack we'd just experienced, the number of lives we'd just lost, it would have been irresponsible NOT to go into Iraq.

However, I certainly agree with everyone else on how poorly it was managed after that point.

And I'm still not getting this whole 'personal agenda' thing people are attributing to Bush. There's no evidence whatsoever. Personally, I think the man is too simple-minded to be as manipulative as he'd need to be in order to pull something like this off without 'cause'.

Alot of politicians made their decision because of the Bush fear-machine. If you didn't go along with what he was selling, you were labled unpatriotic and letting the terrorists win. Not everybody believed it. I didn't believe it, and I don't have access to classified documents. I just have common sense that told be that Iraq was NOT a eminent threat. And it makes me sad that all these politicians were so spineless.

He may be simple-minded, but he had people behind him who did all the dirty work for him.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Perhaps I'm just being an idealist, but I tend to think that the politicians on board with going into Iraq back in those days were making the 'right' decision based on the circumstances. I agree that he's never been the 'right' guy for the job as President, but I just don't see all of this 'malicious' intent that others do.

not malicious.
simply put, his " intent " was based on interests older than him.
economic mostly.
most villains don't see themselves as such, I don't think he was thinking " hahahaha look at how I invade Iraq...ain't I evil?" but simply " this WILL be profitable" abd it has been for him and his friends.
to the cost of many innocents.
I mean, Africa was a far more important crisis at the moment of ther Iraq invasion.