This whole thing seems so crazy to me. I was opposed to going to Iraq from the beginning(I hate hearing myself say such a cliche'd phrase) but I knew that once we were there, we'd be there for good. We're never leaving Iraq and if we did, it would be an even bigger disaster

"We're never leaving Iraq and if we did, it would be an even bigger disaster."

That's a conventional bit of wisdom that is often repeated but has little basis in reality.

>> ^rougy:
"We're never leaving Iraq and if we did, it would be an even bigger disaster."
That's a conventional bit of wisdom that is often repeated but has little basis in reality.


Really? So your saying Sunnis and Shias will stop trying to kill each other if only the Americans leave the country? I think I'd go further than Ryjkyj and say that leaving Saddam in power was also a bigger disaster.

He without question fueled the sectarian violence far worse than the Americans have because that was in many ways his goal. And that isn't even talking about his campaign to entirely eliminate the Kurdish people. I think that the mass graves of Northern Iraq are now being dug up in stead of filled up is justification enough for Saddam's removal. How much responsibility the US had in removing him is debatable, but doing it was for the greater good of humanity. To claim otherwise is to be ignorant of Saddam's Al-Anfal campaign and countless other atrocities.