We might be better off.
Regardless of his terrorist ties Saddam was not, is not, a religious fanatic. His ties to al Queda were only of convenience. We could have been his friend as easily as his enemy and those ties would have not been convenient. We could have ceded the Middle East to him in exchange for suppression of Islamic radicals and oil concessions.
Nuclear or not we would always be able to control him with tradition military power and pick him off, if necessary, after he had decimated the terrorist factions. At worst the Islamics would take him out and we are back to square one. More likely he becomes the Third World super power far behind the Western powers.
Remember, I said morality aside, which should never happen but there are many scenarios, good and bad that could have played out if there were no GWI. It is as difficult to rewrite history as it is to predict the future.
The main point of this whimsy is that we would have lots more options if we were as sinister as a few around here seem to believe.
Current Events » in reply to After
Morality aside
The whole thread (39 posts)
- An answer on "Global Test"
- "Gobal Test" may have been an unfortunate choice of words. I wonder if "Global dialog" might not have been better. (n/t)
- re: Nope...
- Here, a picture says a thousand words...
- I don't get the part where the cartoonist has to lie about what Kerry said to make what he said palatable
- After
- d'oh, sorry, directed to Tom...... (n/t)
- Here, a picture says a thousand words...
