At 4/3/07 10:23 PM, Dre-Man wrote:
The difference is, that World War II actually meant something.
I've seen a couple other posts pertaining to this same thing, as well.
Brief history lesson for the memory impaired:
We invaded Iraq based on faulty intelligence which at the time seemed like solid, definitive proof that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.
We launched a preemptive strike on Iraq in the event that Saddam intended to use the WMD's on the U.S. or our allies. Unreasonable? Fuck no. Saddam had ties with Al-Qaeda, and obviously they mean business.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons /1/17/TerroristAttacksAlQaeda.png
We covered our asses by fucking them up in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and we even liberated the Iraqis at the expense of 3,000 of our finest, and countless other casualties of other allied forces.
Anyway, they didn't have WMD's. Our fault? Kinda, not really. When given information that is provided as reliable and when facing situations like more innocent loss of life, I think GWB acted appropriately
Today, without any WMDs being found, we're still in Iraq.
Why?
They're going batshit without a dictator, and until all the assholes can cope, we need to stay there and patch the hole that we widened by taking down the dictator.
The majority of Iraqi's did not like the tyrant Saddam, but there are assholes who did.
The remaining assholes are fucking everything up, and those are the motherfuckers we're neutralizing today.
Anyway man, the threat presented by Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda does mean something. Even if today we're not defending what we once were, we had a just cause to intervene, and if we left now, that would just be fucked up.