From the Japaness POV the thinking is much the same Nuke.
The Japanese saw the US as a threat to their national security. They took preemptive action to address that threat.
The US saw Iraq as a threat to our national security. We took preemptive action to address that threat.
From the points of view of the attacking nation, the comparison is almost identical.
A: it is a fact they had WMD and that not all were acounted for
And they still aren't. So what did we accomplish?
B: who knows if they are still there? I know that Saddam has no chance at using or rebuilding them. I know that instead of the UN getting close to declairing Iraq in full compliance without verifiying what happened to tons of WMD, we are on the ground there looking for them, not Hanx Blix
Exactly. They may still be there. Saddam can't use them but what if Sadr and his friends know where they are and are waiting for the right moment to spirit a few out of town and FedEx them to DC? How hard are we looking?
My assessment is that WMD is a very minor priority right now compared to just getting the Iraqi government front and center on the world stage. In short, I think there's just about noone looking for them. Besides that, we've had SH himself for a long time. If anyone knew where to look, I'd think he'd be the one. So far... nothing.
So what did we accomplish? If those WMD are still there and not in our hands, they are still a threat and will be an even greater threat when we pull out.
C: If they are in Syria, then that means Iraq did have WMD which alone justified the war.
Yeah, but it's also my opinion that the WMD are an equal or greater threat to us if in Syrian control. So why aren't we taking Syria down too? If this hypothesis is correct, we have not removed the threat at all.
So what did we accomplish? Nothing.
I don't think you can compare the Germans and Japanese to Iraq. There was a huge difference in the societal mores. Germany and Japan were industrialized societies on the rise prior to the war. Given the tools, they rebuilt themselves into something better relatively quickly.
Iraq's basically a non-industrialized third world country with oil. Has been almost forever. VietNam about was the same way without the oil.
Different situation there and it bears on their transformation into a free society.
I What do you think we should have done?
More to the point, what HAVE we done that was worth 800+ soldiers to accomplish? We have neither verified nor removed any WMD threat.
800 plus Americans did not die for no reason, They may go down in history as the people who helped bring democracy to the Middle east......even though that was not our main goal.
Maybe so. But maybe not.
That would be the ONLY thing in this mess that could even begin to justify this loss of our soldiers. As I said, that task would be better left to Iraqi boys and girls.
Our main goal was to ensure Saddam and Iraq did not have WMD.
When we've found essentially NOTHING, how can you say we achieved this? Either we didn't remove the WMD or they weren't there in the first place.
You know, we got along with hundreds of thousands of Warsaw Pact troops facing us and tens of thousands of nukes pointed at us for about 40 years. Tensions ran to the red line a few times but we're all still here.
The NK's have had nukes for a while. Kim is probably even more of a fruitcake than SH. We're all still here.
Iran is on the verge of having nukes; they have an Islamic dinosaur nutbag running the show. We're all still here.
Good things can and will come of this...
Sure that's possible. I think those "good things" didn't need to be bought with American blood. That's where we differ.
I'd rather have those guys home with their families this Christmas than have Iraq rid of Hussein. Hussein was THEIR problem, not ours.
