Quote Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Oh really - Ask George H. W. Bush - he may disagree. Saddam had a whole country and billions of dollars at his disposal, was actively attacking American forces, supported terrorists, and tried to have national leaders assassinated.. thats a threat in my book.
He could have never attacked to US. He knew you were coming back however, he tried to be prepared, he failed miserably.


When was that ever muslim territory. I believe it was British and the UN gave it to the Israelis.
Since the Prophet himself, or just about I guess. It might have belonged to other nations in name, but there were still muslims living there, working their land and praying to Allah. Israel drove them out of their homes and took their land, and keeps expanding to this day.


Who said we were the world police. .we act when our national security is threatened or when the world community asks us to help.


Oh Im ruthless? Your the one who would leave the Kuwaitis and Saudis to Saddam. Your the one who would have America abandon her obligations around the world. I never advocated killing millions - only dissolving arab governments and armies in the mideast. It doesnt look like youve got much of a high horse to be preaching from.
The way we are fighting the war today - no. The only thing keeping us from completely destroying the insurgency is our desire to help the iraqis out. If we werent so worried about rebuilding that country and making it into a democracy, our weaponry could render the nation harmless for decades to come.
.

The only way I see to win this war is to occupy the entire middle east and make the people there so fearful and yet so dependent on the US they wouldnt think about harming us. It will be possible soon with very few casualties with the latest military weaponry being developed.
You seem to be in favor of taking away all their rights at self government, removing all anti-government (yours) thought and want to do this using force.

Is this so different from what Saddam was doing ?