Plum Crazy

No link between Hussein's Iraq and terrorism? Perhaps you've forgotton the bounty Hussein paid to Palestiians killing Jews.

No link between Hussein's Iraq and Al Qaeda? Perhaps you've forgotton OBL's words. He attacked us because we were in Saudi Arabia enfrcing the no-fly zones in Iraq, for an attack by one Muslim nation on another, while the Muslim nations around the world stood by waiting for the great satan to establish a coalition to drive Hussein out of Kuwait, with token cooperation by Muslim's. And what was OBL doing to stop one Muslim from Killing another? Nothing.

The war in a Iraq a war that was unneeded? Perhaps, but it wasn't shrub II that started it. It started under shrub I(and continued through Clinton) to shrub II. We were in a constant state of war with Iraq, having flown more sorties in the interim years than we did in cold war activities directed at the Soviet Union.

Maybe you mean that the escalation of war fighting shouldn't have happened. Didn't make a difference to OBL. The low grade war was enough to use as a recruiting tool. I'ld bet that it wouldn't have mattered if we weren't in Sauidi Arabia. We are a global power, with global interests, any old excuse works for sick bastards that spout or believe the jihadists propaganda.

As for the level of violence and death in Iraq, there are several reasons. Op-Tempo being one of them. The higher the op tempo, the more opperations engaged in to root out jihadists, the more exposure to death dealing terrorists. Increased sophistication in IED's is another. Keep in mind that there is NO armor capable of defeating current explosive technology. If a single mortar round is found to be incapable of penetrating armor deployed to the field then the bombmaker resorts to more explosives. As we change our armor/tactics so do they. Battle is not static. There are more reasons, but I think I'll stop here.

Oh and BTW progress is being made. Last week we handed Najaf over to Iraqi control.

Justin,

I can't speak for Jon, but I think that any statement about the relationship between Saddam Hussein is the word substantial. We know he gave money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, but that was a) after the fact and b) was to people who did not show any inclination to exporting their terrorism to the US. That fact is pretty thin gruel to justify a half a trillion dollars and 2000 American lives and countless innocent Iraqi lives, but your mileage may very.

This stands in sharp contrast to Saudi Ara I can't speak for Jon, but I think that any statment about the relationship between Saddam Hussein is the word substiantial. We know he gave money to palistianinan bia who was and is currently sponsoring terrorists who do want export their terrorism to the US, who are brutal dictators, and who are basically pay terrorists group what amounts to protection money so the oil infrastructure stays “safe” (not to mention generating $$$ to pay the protection).

The fact is that there were no terrorist attacks on Iraqi soil before the invasion, now it’s a terrorists playground and democratizing Iraq will only make the country better suited to harbor terrorists (as recent examples in the UK illustrate).

The sad part is that the current power struggle in Iraq was completely predictable as the recent lessons in the former Eastern block countries of Yugoslavia and Bosnia in the wake of the power vacuum left after the strongman governments lost power. But the Bush administration seems to have an imagination problem, as it they just can’t imagine how wrong everything could have gotten. The insurgents and terrorists have been in their last throws for well over three years now and it getting worse.

I would have settled for never ending inspections rather then a never ending low grade counter insurgency operation. It would have bee

You did a good job speaking for me Rick.

One other thing I should have mentioned. When we went into Afganistan and began killing the Taliban and their cohorts, they started fleeing. Some just ran to the hills and hid. Some merely crossed the border into Pakistan. But some significant figures (zarqawi) went to Iraq - before we ramped the warfighting in Iraq back up to a full fledged war (remember the fighting in Iraq didn't stop at GWI it just scaled back to a strategy of containment, sanctions and warnings).

"The fact is that there were no terrorist attacks on Iraqi soil before the invasion"

Define terrorist attacks. Hussein specialized in terrorizing within his border and had aspirations for expanding that beyond his border, and had demonstrated several times his willingness to do so. What (Maginot) line in the sand should we draw and end appeasment? When does a despot demonstrate himself as a legitimate target for removal? Legitimate targets abound - I know - realpolitik determines when actions can be taken against legitimate targets - "but where do we stop?" Well if more action is taken against a select few despots and I am willing to bet fewer despots will rise to Hussein's level of malevolence.

Substantial is a subjective term. What is substantial to you may be well beyond substantial for me. I only listed the payola, but I could have gone on. Hussein's Iraq was a safe haven for terrorists, as long as they played by Husseins rules while in country. He provided financial support in the wider terrorism web (I didn't say alliance - that would be incorrect).

There are reasons why this endeavor didn't go as the one in Afganistan, where we depend on the locals for a large portion of the warfighting while providing support, logistics and special ops expertice. That strategy wouldn't work in Iraq. Remember we turned our backs on the shia when they started a revolt post GWI. After that they don't trust us to "have their back." And who can blame them? So in order to finish the business of GWI, rather than an unending presence in the middle east "oppressing" a muslim nation we needed to go to war and finish it or pull out. Sanctions, warnings and UN corruption in oil for bribes for food used as a tool of oppression was not (IMO) a legitimate option.