Comment Re:usa is stronger than ALL ELSE (Score 1) 688
Democrat or Republican it doesn't matter. If you believe the Democratic Party would not have attacked Iraq you are very naive. Ignoring the rhetoric, there is no real difference between the Democratic and Republic parties, both are for big business. Clinton de-regulated industry far more than Reagon ever did.
Removing Bush from office, while needed, would not make much of a change. It would take much more than this to fix things, including replacing most of Congress, state legislatures and governors, and finally mayors and the city councils in the larger cities. Additional strong political parties as well as more independent candidates would also help.
As for attacking Iraq, this would have happened regardless of who is President for one reason. September 11th. The government had to show that it was doing something. Afghanistan wasn't a newsworthy a target, so Iraq was chosen.
Personally, I have no problem with attacking Iraq. What I do have a problem with was it took over ten years after the first Gulf War to remove Saddam from power and the excuse given for the attacking.
It was complete idiocy to leave Saddam in power to balance a perceived threat from Iran. Many of the soldiers I know who came back from the first Gulf War complained about this and even warned that we would have to do it again a decade or two later. In fact it aided the extremists in recruiting new members due in part to our increased presence in the Middle East to contain Saddam, although thats not saying our presense would not have been there anyway, it would have been smaller if we removed him the first time.
Removing Bush from office, while needed, would not make much of a change. It would take much more than this to fix things, including replacing most of Congress, state legislatures and governors, and finally mayors and the city councils in the larger cities. Additional strong political parties as well as more independent candidates would also help.
As for attacking Iraq, this would have happened regardless of who is President for one reason. September 11th. The government had to show that it was doing something. Afghanistan wasn't a newsworthy a target, so Iraq was chosen.
Personally, I have no problem with attacking Iraq. What I do have a problem with was it took over ten years after the first Gulf War to remove Saddam from power and the excuse given for the attacking.
It was complete idiocy to leave Saddam in power to balance a perceived threat from Iran. Many of the soldiers I know who came back from the first Gulf War complained about this and even warned that we would have to do it again a decade or two later. In fact it aided the extremists in recruiting new members due in part to our increased presence in the Middle East to contain Saddam, although thats not saying our presense would not have been there anyway, it would have been smaller if we removed him the first time.
