Regime change is the primary reason we are there. Intervention is our middle name, balance of power is our game. We have been messing around in the middle east since WWII and we aren't about to stop now. We propped up Saddam and it was our responsibility to take him out when he destabilized the region. Thru the 90s, the security establishment tried to convince Bush I and Clinton to take Baghdad, but they wouldn't go for it. The free flow of oil is also another justification for regime change along with:bassist_25 wrote:I'm not going to lose any sleep over Iran getting invaded, or North Korea for that matter. I'd still like to know the whole purpose of invading Iraq though.
After 9/11 a tactical problem that needed undone was that we had a good deal of our troops tied up with babysitting the U.N. Iraq sanctions and guarding the no-fly zones. Finishing up Iraq would finally free them up for other deployment. Oops. Looks like they botched that one.
Then there's the WMDs. There is indisputable evidence that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. Period. Disputing this fact is no different than disputing the Holocaust. Confiscating these were top on the list and the chief justification for the invasion. What we would all like to know is: What happened to them?
We don't know yet. Saddam may very well have dismantled these programs and disposed of the materials. If so, he f-worded up by not turning them over to the U.N. inspectors. WMDs are relatively small when compared to tactical ordnance. They could have easily packed them up and trucked them to a willing Syria or buried them in the desert. The plain truth is...we don't know.
Political extremists would like us to believe that there never were any WMDs, but thousands of dead Kurds and Shias tell a different story. Its too bad that when a half-truth is told often enough, people start believing it.
(Your "Worship", moi? HA!) You know what? NO! I'm not going to give the condescending and patronizing voices further audience ("HA HA", my Eminence, a JOKE!