Because of the inordinate drain on the US Treasury caused by Iraq, many other possibilities of doing good have been lost or postponed. Who is to say that the need in Iraq was greater or lesser than those other needs.
One only needs to stop and think for about 1 second about the cost to our economy of 9/11.
I am thinking of that......the toppling of Iraq has not changed the cost of the war on terrorism. Its ongoing.
The cost of the war in Iraq is not all that great -- particularly when you consider the savings that will result from eliminating the perpetual presence in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and other places to maintain the PERMANENT no-fly zones.
Yes, that's true. What is the current cost to maintain the bases for flyovers? Its likely we will close the base[s] in Saudi Arabia; however, I do not foresee us leaving Kuwait. Nonetheless, the closings in Saudi Arabia will result in some savings.
While we're spending more right now, that spending will eventually be minimal.
Maybe........it depends on how long we will be in Iraq.
Maintaining the no-fly zones would never have ended had not Bush removed Saddam.
"Never" is a long time.........Saddam was mortal. Sometimes its best to let people experience their own manifest destiny.
As for the war's righteousness, nothing can be called righteous when people are led into an event under false premises as they have been with this one
I'm not sure most people would agree with you about there being "false pretenses".
You would be surprised how many people are beginning to question the pretenses of Bush and Blair. Actually, you should not be surprised......the latest polls are making that point very clear.
And they certainly wouldn't have had the Dems not politicized it. I personally think Bush used every ounce of persuasive ability he could muster,
You are being kind......he went beyond persuasive ability.
but there continues to be not one shred of evidence that there were any "false pretenses" -- in fact, the evidence, if one is willing to look, strongly suggests that every one of Bush's "reasons" for removing Saddam were present.
You know, its one thing to deceive; its another to pretend you don't understand what the problem is. At times, I actually enjoy posting with you but if you're going to pretend that the current brouhaha over WMD and uranium purchases is the evil plotting of the Dem., then we are wasting each other's time.
There continues to be zero evidence of anything that could be called "false pretenses" -- although the Dems running for office would have the weak minded believe the contrary.
On the contrary, there looks to be considerable evidence that the Bush administration played hard and fast with the truth. Frankly, Bush lies poorly and yesterday's press conference with Blair was an embarrassment. You could tell Blair was lying too but he did it much more convincingly.
In any case, Bush and Blair took a calculated risk and lost, or rather, they've been caught. They must pay for their mendacity and hubris. There can be no other way.........their inappropriate behavior has cost us too much.
As for the Dems., they are a disappointment in this whole matter IMO. They came into it very late instead of leading the charge like one would expect. The one thing I now can agree with you is that the Dems. are much weaker than I once thought. In any case, your blaming them is silly.......it was the media mostly that exposed this mess and showed us what was happening.........the media and some honest Reps. Its them you should be proud of.......not Bush, Rummy and Cheney et al. |
