Oh god…where do I begin? Consider the following:
“Well, Iraq, for one thing. I believe we were right to invade, to topple Saddam Hussein, and to stick around and make certain the bad guys don’t win. I’m sure even you wouldn’t want to see Al Qaeda using Iraqi oil revenue to fund worldwide terrorism.”
The above quote is staggering in it misrepresentation. Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, but a secular tyrant. Fundamentalist groups like Al Qaeda were a threat to his authority and were brutally repressed. This is inherent in the Bath political ideology. Even the Bush administration was eventually forced to admit this. Did you mean to imply that Al Qaeda would replace Saddam Hussein? First, this would only be possible because of the invasion. Second, it implies that Al Qaeda would be able to co-opt the entire Bath political and security structure. This is again a glaring contradiction since it implies wholesale conversion of the Sunni from a secular to a fundamentalist ideology. Thirdly, what about the Shia majority and their allies in Iran? Do you honestly believe they would acquiesce to an Al Qaeda take-over in Iraq?
The invasion of Iraq has rescued Al Qaeda from oblivion and given them credibility they could never have achieved on their own. I am astonish that you could defend such a devastating error.
