Hasbeen,
The intelligence on Iraq was dubious to say the least and based on out of date reports and hearsay. It was obvious there was a wide gulf between the rhetoric and reality in the lead up to the war and at face value little evidence suggested that Saddam was a threat to any of its neighbors, to the contrary, considerable steps had been taken to improve ties with former foes in the region. Deterrence had continued to be the most successful strategy against Saddam, but to define the war in terms of security and regional stability is much too narrow.

It was the ideologues in Washington (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz et al.) that believed forcing freedom, democracy and free enterprise onto Iraq changing the status quo in the region would subsequently create political reform in neighboring states which had been the goal of the ideologues long before 9/11. What an utter and complete cock-up, from the word go they just made matters worse, lie after lie.

GO OBAMA!

CJ,

I won’t argue the toss over whether the original invasion of Iraq was justified. It is surely now largely irrelevant in terms of what should be our current policy concerning Iraq. I am not suggesting we forget the lesson, merely that we need to move on.

5 years ago all we heard from the soft-left was “No blood for oil”. Furthermore, many from the left have tried very hard to ensure that we lose in Iraq. Continually rabbiting on about “exit strategies” when they should be focusing on helping the Iraqi gov’t win. The US troop surge showed that military power has a role in the outcome of this conflict. There is no doubt that the political and humanitarian/developmental aspects are vital. But without the guns on the ground, without security, there is no political solution

Hasbeen is right about the WMD. Saddam did at one stage have them. They were not fictitious. What I accept is that by the time we got around to invading, they had either all been destroyed by the Iraqis and the inspectors, or they had been shipped to Syria or somewhere else.

Civil disorder is not almost complete, that is entirely fictitious. There are many regions in Iraq which are functioning well and are free from violence. The Kurdish regions and those regions involved in the Sunni awakening are relatively secure and rebuilding is being undertaken. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/12/02/2007-12-02_what_i_see_every_day_in_iraq_locals_turn.html?print=1&page=all
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001514.html

Iraq has a government that was elected by its people. One of the minority in the region. Do you honestly think Iraq can survive as a country if we just got up and left?

What is your solution? How do we best help Iraqis to drive out AlQaeda and Hezbollah and the IRGC and rebuild their country?

Peachy,

The Iraqis showed by their brave turnout during the elections process what they think about freedom and democracy. And I don’t think they needed any convincing on free enterprise.

Foxy

I agree with your post 100%.

As much as I would like to see a female president - I don't believe that Hilary is the right choice, right now. Although she would be a formidable vice-president. My hope is that she will join Obama, together they can move America into the 21st century.

Obama continues to impress me and if the USA really wants a change towards a fairer nation, then I would like to see him elected as president. Of course, it matters not, what we here in Australia think. The USA will decide and the rest of the world can only watch.

Paul.L
Reasons for occupying aside, the management of this war has been extremely amateurish which shows the future is far more unpredictable and the process of change far more complex as any ideologue in Washington would like to think.

"Saddam was pushing the WMD bit, & managed to fool everybody, the US, & particularly Iran. He was terrified of Iran, after loosing most of his military capicity, & his WMD myth was his last line of defense."

You say that, Hasbeen, as if the only available source of information on Iraq's WMD was Saddam Hussein. In actuality, the Israeli, US and Saudi intelligence agencies had been all over Iraq for decades, and Hans Blix's weapon inspection team had come up empty handed time and time again. Even as the case for war was being made, members of the intelligence services were protesting that it was a load of bollocks which made a mockery of their hard work.

No, Presidents Rumsfeld and Cheney (and that sock puppet they use - "Bush", isn't it?) knew full well that Iraq was toothless. In fact, it was a precondition of the invasion. You don't think they'd get stuck into North Korea, do you?

And there's only one "o" in "losing".

Can't say I am wildly enthusiastic about any of the nominees but it is up to the Americans.
What we should be looking at is the problems involved in such elections. They are far from democratic and the cost involved makes it even more so.
Australians could learn something from this but it is unlikely they will.