logical leap

[low_delta]

In a speech staunchly defending the U.S.-led war in Iraq as part of the Bush administration's efforts to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, Cheney said the arguments over the administration's handling of Iraq are "helping to frame the most important debate of the post-9/11 era."

So how did deposing Saddam Hussein help to diminish the threat of terrorism?

Comments

[specificocean.livejournal.com]

It increased the chances of Bush's oil buddies to add to their profits...

[dwivian]

The argument is this --

Terrorists want weapons.
Saddam has shown sympathy to the terrorists (there are records of him sending them money and supplies).
Saddam had WMDs, so we said.
If terrorists wanted something worse to top the 9/11 event, they had a chance with him of acquiring those WMDs.
Saddam wouldn't prove he DIDN'T have the WMDs, as required by UN.
UN authorized the use of force against Iraq (1440, as I recall)
After several years of trial inspections, the US decided to take action under UN authorization to remove WMDs, because they could be sold to terrorists (or, even, given away).

No Saddam, no connection to his regime, no chance for the weapons to fall into the wrong hands.

That help?

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Sending money and supplies to what terroists? The teenage girls that blew themselves up in Israel? I'd be surprised if there was any Middle eastern nation that didn't suport some sort of terrorist effort.

So where does that leave us? Trying to make an example of Iraq. But it's not doing us any good. It's only fanning the flames. You can't stop fanatics by making some of them martyrs.

which terrorists?

[dwivian]

Al-Queda, primarily, were the friends of the Hussein family. Not him, particularly, but one of his sons. The same people that wanted to blow up bits of our country had access to a leader of a country with nasty stuff....

And, we've now done what we needed to do, and Iraqi citizens enjoy many benefits, including significantly improved infrastructure. In time we'll make it a solid country, and then the militants will take over, and.....

Re: which terrorists?

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Funny, I heard that Hussein was on binLaden's hit list, fo rbeing a secular leader.

And the infrastructure over there sucks.

Re: which terrorists?

[dwivian]

Maybe that was to elevate their friend to the position of leader of the state?

And, Hussein was not a secular leader -- he was leader of a secular country. He had just finished a copy of the Koran in his own blood....

And, the infrastructure in Iraq is stronger than it has ever been. Check out the electric lines which are now better than their pre-war capacity.

Re: which terrorists?

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Hm. Hadn't heard that. I wonder how good they're going to make things. Are they going to go "all the way"? Will Iraq be an oasis in the Middle East? They're going to have to make it into a paradise before the average person stops hating the US.

Re: which terrorists?

[dwivian]

Yeah -- proof that there are still strong liberal ties to the media. You'd think a major success like this would have gotten off the newswire and onto ABC news, right? But, it never did....

Bagdhad used to be the oasis of the Middle East, years ago, but I don't think even perfect living standards will soften that hatred of the Great Satan...

[vwip.livejournal.com]

Can *you* prove that you don't have WMDs?

[dwivian]

Yes.