Where the Battle of Algiers rages on ...Rick's Cafe Americain

(1) to unseat a dictator (with a little revenge for daddy); (2) to bring democracy to the Middle East; (3) to combat (how is not clear) terrorism; (4) because a higher calling told Bush to; and (5) an amorphous belief it would make things safer and more stable.

Here is why I disagree with those reasons.

(1) A great a noble idea. Problem is that (a) there are lots of dictators and Saddam is not the worst, why Iraq?, (b) one nation going around doing regime change and “nation” building is scary, if it is done, it should be a coalition effort and LEADERSHIP is building that coalition (FYI - England does not a coalition make); (c) it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(2) Easier said than done, as this experience has shown. Why is invading a country the best way to bring democracy to it? Certain institutions usually need to be in place for a democracy to work and be practical, many of those were lacking and they are not so easy to impose. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(3) Invading a muslim country would appear to create more terrorists, not less. No evidence that Iraq was solidly behind any substantial anti-U.S. terrorism. AND troops and $$ was diverted from Afghanistan, which is where the terrorists (and some guy named Osama) are. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(4) Ummm....that is just fucking scary. I mean really scary. Also the same motivation (if a different god) as Muslim extremists—at least the intellectually honest ones. Religion and politics don’t mix well, having a President who mixes them more than, perhaps, any President in history—not a good thing. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(5) I thought it would destabilize the region. However, I never thought it would be this bad. Bush, et al, apparently believed we would be hailed as heroes ... the naivete of this view alone (read any history books, pay any attention to the Middle East) should disqualify Bush from being President. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

Will someone please wake up and notice the fact that the U.S. is no longer the unquestioned economic super power (see also previous comments on this here). Our education is subpar. HIGH TECH jobs are being exported. Other, leaner nations, are spending essentially no money on war and much more money on educating their populace for the high tech future. I am not saying we get rid of our military, or even decrease (pre-Iraq war) spending. But going around the world trying to impose our ideals is a damn good way to drain away Americans hard earned money (and lives). But, of course, according to the far right, we should also cut taxes at the same time.  A recipe for disaster in my humble opinion.

(1) to unseat a dictator (with a little revenge for daddy); (2) to bring democracy to the Middle East; (3) to combat (how is not clear) terrorism; (4) because a higher calling told Bush to; and (5) an amorphous belief it would make things safer and more stable.

Here is why I disagree with those reasons.

(1) A great a noble idea. Problem is that (a) there are lots of dictators and Saddam is not the worst, why Iraq?, (b) one nation going around doing regime change and “nation” building is scary, if it is done, it should be a coalition effort and LEADERSHIP is building that coalition (FYI - England does not a coalition make); (c) it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(2) Easier said than done, as this experience has shown. Why is invading a country the best way to bring democracy to it? Certain institutions usually need to be in place for a democracy to work and be practical, many of those were lacking and they are not so easy to impose. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(3) Invading a muslim country would appear to create more terrorists, not less. No evidence that Iraq was solidly behind any substantial anti-U.S. terrorism. AND troops and $$ was diverted from Afghanistan, which is where the terrorists (and some guy named Osama) are. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(4) Ummm....that is just fucking scary. I mean really scary. Also the same motivation (if a different god) as Muslim extremists—at least the intellectually honest ones. Religion and politics don’t mix well, having a President who mixes them more than, perhaps, any President in history—not a good thing. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

(5) I thought it would destabilize the region. However, I never thought it would be this bad. Bush, et al, apparently believed we would be hailed as heroes ... the naivete of this view alone (read any history books, pay any attention to the Middle East) should disqualify Bush from being President. And it will create a huge economic drain on the U.S.

Will someone please wake up and notice the fact that the U.S. is no longer the unquestioned economic super power (see also previous comments on this here). Our education is subpar. HIGH TECH jobs are being exported. Other, leaner nations, are spending essentially no money on war and much more money on educating their populace for the high tech future. I am not saying we get rid of our military, or even decrease (pre-Iraq war) spending. But going around the world trying to impose our ideals is a damn good way to drain away Americans hard earned money (and lives). But, of course, according to the far right, we should also cut taxes at the same time.  A recipe for disaster in my humble opinion.