Three of your four arguments are Iraq-centric, and the fourth is about the side issue of the benefits to Israel of conquering Iraq. That's not enough to dissuade me that you're not fixated on Iraq.
I still think we need to step back and judge all of our actions in the context of the war on terror. And what do we mean by that? All terrorists, everywhere? Do we go after the IRA? Latin American insurgents? American militia groups? Quebec separatists? Or should we focus and prioritize?
If we prioritize, then certainly Terror Enemy #1 is Al Qaeda. Since we know for a fact that there's a large remnant of Al Qaeda remaining in the Afghanistan area, working in cahoots with a large remnant of the Taliban, shouldn't we be putting more energy into finishing what we started? And if so, then isn't a war against Iraq on grounds that so far have proven hypothetical a distraction?
Current Events » in reply to I don't believe that Iraq has been a distraction at all
I'm not convinced
The whole thread (31 posts)
- Christopher Hitchens again on Iraq
- Despite the short term Baathist revenge attacks, things are definitely improving in Iraq
- The last 4 paragraphs of the article you cited
- They have a lot of oil to sell.
- re: The last 4 paragraphs of the article you cited
- Well now that Iraq's oil wealth is no longer diverted to build opulent presidential palaces and filling up Baathist bank accounts...
- re: The last 4 paragraphs of the article you cited
- The last 4 paragraphs of the article you cited
- Despite the short term Baathist revenge attacks, things are definitely improving in Iraq
