Sqrl on 16 June 2008
| Kasz216 said: I'd argue Sadam Hussein's destablizing of the region was good for us. They kept Iran in check. I mean... that's why the US put him their in the first place. Unlike the current Iraq government which is actually more Pro-Iran... all we've really done is put the middle east a little more into the pockets of Iran. |
Honestly the "what if"s of what would have happened or even will happen are highly speculative to say the least. I actually stated it as a side point and not a major one, partly for this reason.
You could certainly argue that position, but that position admits that we had two problems (Iraq and Iran) that precariously counteracted each other. And if we assume for a moment that this was the case I would ask why we should continue to rely on our enemies to counteract each other? I personally have a hard time believing any strategy that relies on our enemies continuing to act in our benefit is a good one.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
