Ok, following that logic - what was wrong with their infastructure before it was bombed out? You recall the phrase "reconstruction funds". Why would you need to reconstruct something unless it had been destoyed? As I understand it there were no lines ups for gas, no suicide bombers in Iraq before the invasion. And After the 1991 destruction and invasion, it seems they were finally getting back in their feet. Doesn't the West have a history of destroying countries to make them submit economically? Leading to another point, who is in control of the oil money and oil fields now. Another question: based on your post are we to say that the most powerful country and military can't maintain order or rebuid a country? Your attitude surprises me, I thought the offical line is that the USA loves muslims and is simply liberating them - to spread freedom. The US the most powerful army had a unique opportunity in 1991 to remove a dictator in Iraq. But it was not done. Is that a concidence? Is anything a concidence when oil and money is involved? Your post raises many questions and answers nothing.
it was definitely worth it. Problem always is that mofo politician limit military at what they can do. We had Republican guard surrounded and we let them go to become insurgent and guerillas. We should just kill them all. Saddam should never be captured alive. If he was killed on the spot there would be much less resistence. I bet there is many people believing that he will be ruler again. There are very effective means to control guerillas but military is not allowed to use them. Now it is such a mess that only solution is to split Iraq into four autonomies . It was worth it in the sense that everybody know the true face of the islam and quiet diversion is much more difficult for muslims to do.
I said in the very beginning of my previous post that the war in Iraq was a major blunder so I am not sure why you respond as if I said it was not. My main point though was that the Iraqis are medieval fanatical idiots. They could use this american blunder to their advantage, they got an unprecedented (and completely undeserved) chance to turn their stinking dirt-poor dictatorship into a modern, free and prosperous democracy. They did not even need to do anything, the american soldier was shedding the blood, the american taxpayer was footing the bill. The Iraqis totally blew it, they and most other arab/muslim countries have always been oppressive shitholes, they will remain oppressive shitholes for generations to come.
So if Israel was invaded, leadership ousted, and a model society where there would be a guaranteed situation of no wars or conflict with neighbors were offered, Israelis would gladly accept such an offer....
No way it was worth it... 1. Saddam was not a threat, he was contained. 2. There were no WMD. 3. Oil prices did not decline, they went higher (think of all the lost revenue by paying higher oil and gas prices). 4. We had to go into debt to finance war 5. War rages on. 6. Death of US soldiers and wounded. 7. More terrorist have been produced, many now battle tested. 8. The distraction of being bogged down in Iraq allowed Iran and North Korea to grow stronger. 9. We alienated many of our allies. 10. Potential for a failed state remains. 11. Divided the country following 9/11, during a time when we needed to get Bin Laden and come together. Just a brief list...in no particular order of importance...
If Israel was a third-world, dirt poor, repressive regime ruled by an iron fist of a bloodthirsty dictator like Iraq was, if their only chance for a better life rested upon the willigness of the most benevolent superpower in history to liberate, democratize and modernize them...sure, why not. Germany and Japan accepted that in 1945 (albeit under different circumstances) and I don't think they have any regrets. The problem with you comparison is that Israel is already a modern, democratic, civilized and prosperous society, Iraq was a shithole before the invasion, it still is and it will always be a shithole. PS I am not saying that the war was justified from the american point of view, it sure was not but the Iraqis are even bigger idiots, they won the lottery and threw the winning ticket in the trash.
You are dodging the point, obviously... Israel is a modern society, that can't seem to make peace with its neighbors, which is costly in both lives and economics to itself and its neighbors...and US taxpayers. So if someone can offer them a better deal, they should just embrace it with no resistance, right? They should give up their religious beliefs, their thousands year old hatred of their neighbors, their eye for an eye fued, their culture, their belief that they are the chosen ones of God, etc.....simply because a more "evolved" society says they should....
LOL, first of all Israel's neighbors refuse to make peace with israel, not the other way around as you just lied. Second the US is not depriving the Iraqis of their religiuos beliefs, history, prejudices etc as you also just lied. This country offered them a chance of a better life, they turned it down and chose to remain savages. Fine by me but don't expect my sympathy or admiration, they are not freedom fighters, they are idiots. And finally you have to be realistic about available options, the Iraqis had two choices - be oppressed by Saddam and his descendands for the next millenium or be liberated by the americans and create a free prosperous democracy. Given that Israel's options at this time are completely different and vastly superior your comparison of Iraqi shithole with Israeli democracy is absurd.
Let's end this now, we know how you are going to reason... Israel never does anything wrong, they are blameless, yada, yada, yada... Israel is evolved, everyone else is a savage, blah, blah, blah... You are going to dodge the point I am making, which is no one has a right to tell another soverign nation or its people how to live their life...no matter what... I long ago concluded that you are incapable of intellectual honesty when it comes to Israel...