First of all, I hope everyone here understands that the war was not about oil. There simply is no debate here, for the prices of oil were only slightly affected, and Occhidiangela's excellent post about the reasons why oil could not be a factor should be reviewed.
However, I do believe that it is the rather chilling leadership of the so-called "neo-conservatives." The website that Nicodemus Phaulkon posted a while ago had the scariest understated mission statement I've ever seen. The need to agressively intefere in hot spots, and I do believe that they stated that US leadership of the world was actually better than other nations governing themselves.
Where these people get the arrogance to make such generalized statements, to suggest that the United States is the "calming force" in the world in beyond me.
The truth, I think, is that Iraq most probably did not demolish their least toxic nerve gases, VX and some Sarin, were probably not destroyed. However, the cost of maintaining such WMD, and the increasing pressure of the UN I think enabled Iraq to actually rid itself of most of its arsenal of WMD. Also, the 5 supernations (Security Council) need to rethink the entire concept of disarmament by making sure the United States sets the example of ridding itself of by the far the largest WMD aresnal in the world, with the possible exception of the aging weapons in the former Soviet Union.
I also fail to see the tie the 43rd Administration made to support the "War on Terror" was somehow related with Iraq. 9-11, I suspect, finally made the neo-conservatives outlook appealing to the nation at large. And to be clear, the neo-conservatives are not the same as old conservatives, who believe more in the isolationism and government self-restraint. Like Republicanism with a Democratic Punch. A retired group of CIA officers Administration is now asking members of the CIA to end executive privledge and secrecy by exposing all information that shows that top level administators literally fed information to try to belie the fact that there was no real intelligence over Iraq's WMD.
Does anyone else think, like I do, that the war was also a way for Bush to keep his massive popularity up?
However, I do believe that it is the rather chilling leadership of the so-called "neo-conservatives." The website that Nicodemus Phaulkon posted a while ago had the scariest understated mission statement I've ever seen. The need to agressively intefere in hot spots, and I do believe that they stated that US leadership of the world was actually better than other nations governing themselves.
Where these people get the arrogance to make such generalized statements, to suggest that the United States is the "calming force" in the world in beyond me.
The truth, I think, is that Iraq most probably did not demolish their least toxic nerve gases, VX and some Sarin, were probably not destroyed. However, the cost of maintaining such WMD, and the increasing pressure of the UN I think enabled Iraq to actually rid itself of most of its arsenal of WMD. Also, the 5 supernations (Security Council) need to rethink the entire concept of disarmament by making sure the United States sets the example of ridding itself of by the far the largest WMD aresnal in the world, with the possible exception of the aging weapons in the former Soviet Union.
I also fail to see the tie the 43rd Administration made to support the "War on Terror" was somehow related with Iraq. 9-11, I suspect, finally made the neo-conservatives outlook appealing to the nation at large. And to be clear, the neo-conservatives are not the same as old conservatives, who believe more in the isolationism and government self-restraint. Like Republicanism with a Democratic Punch. A retired group of CIA officers Administration is now asking members of the CIA to end executive privledge and secrecy by exposing all information that shows that top level administators literally fed information to try to belie the fact that there was no real intelligence over Iraq's WMD.
Does anyone else think, like I do, that the war was also a way for Bush to keep his massive popularity up?
In Hoc Signio Vinces.