pookie, let’s get you on record here. Would it have been better if saddam was still in power?[/quote]
How can we know? We can’t compare today’s superb clusterfuck with what could’ve been with Saddam left in place and contained as he had been since Gulf War 1.
What would undoubtedly have been better, would’ve been to go in there with more than a 3 weeks “toppling” plan. A little thinking ahead on how the rebuilding part would be handled. You know, pretend like actual humans would be involved and try to show a little respect.
It would’ve been better to get rid of that shit-fer-brains Rumsfeld and replace him with someone with enough sense to listen to his generals when they were telling him about the required troop numbers to do the jobs properly. And then make sure to have the right number of troops; either through additional recruitment or by building a real coalitiom. Which brings us to…
It would’ve been better to be able to get the support from the international community, instead of going at it alone. It worked well in 1991, no? 20 nations, most with actual armies (unlike your current “Coalition of the Sycophants”), Japan picking up a large part of the tab, etc.
That would’ve been better.
As for leaving Saddam in place, well Kim Jong Il was left in place, no? I guess Bush & Co thought that to be “better” than to go and topple him, right? He’s shooting missiles over Japan and detonating atomic bombs in his back yard. Ain’t that the best?
It’s not that simple. And I’m already familiar with your dimwit technique of repeating stuff like “Irish: I prefer Saddam” while leaving out the rest of the context.
Clowns will be clowns, right?
Let’s hope Japan doesn’t get nuked by NK. I’d like to see you repeat how right Bush played it then.
Is there something you’d like to blame him for? NK’s nukes have got to be his fault, right?
Look at Iraq. See how well that unilateralism is working now. What the Hell was all the fuss about?
Yeah, because he’s got no choice. You’re streched too thin already; Iran knows it and is taking full advantage of the situation.
If you want to attack multilateralism, why don’t you take Gulf War 1 as an example? Hell, take Kosovo. Afghanistan and Iraq aren’t valid examples, because you pulled out of the first one before the job was done to take on Iraq by yourself. And it turns out to be too much for you to handle.
Jeffro, the trap-setting clown. Doesn’t quite work, does it. Keep dancing and telling those great fantasy stories of yours; that’s how we like you.
[quote]You’re welcome for the warning.
T-Nation’s spellchecker flags “JeffR” as a spelling mistake. When I click for a suggestion, it says “Ignore”.
That’s the best suggestion a spell checker has ever given me.