Consider where we would be if Saddam was still in power (in no particular order):

1. Palestinian terrorists would still be rewarded for killing Jews.

2. The sanctions regime would have collapsed, under pressure from our allies, the French, the Russians and the Chinese.

3. Weapons inspectors would still be excluded from Iraq.

4. The US and Britain would still be tied down policing the no-fly-zones.

5. Saddam would still be supporting terrorists – never forget that he sheltered some of the worst, including the WTC bombing ringleader.

6. Iraqis would be dying in far greater numbers than today.

7. Kurdistan would be living under imminent threat.

8. The marshes would still be waterless.

9. Saddam’s weapons program would have been restarted, possibly with aid from AQ Khan’s network.

10. Libya’s nuclear weapons program would be closer to producing a nuclear weapon.

11. The resources that Islamic fascists have had to pour into Iraq would have been diverted to targets closer to home.

News flash: (courtesy of The Strata-sphere)

BRITISH troops in Iraq said they had killed one of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden’s top global lieutenants, who escaped from a US prison in Afghanistan last year.

Omar Faruq was shot dead while resisting arrest during a pre-dawn raid by about 200 British troops in Iraq’s second biggest city, Basra, British military spokesman Major Charlie Burbridge said.

US leaders have described Faruq as the top al-Qaeda operative in South-East Asia.He was caught in Indonesia in 2002 and held at a high-security detention centre at Bagram airbase, north of the Afghan capital Kabul, until his escape last year.

Why was Faruq in Iraq? It’s no longer a safe haven for terrorists, as Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi discovered.

12. Saddam’s continued flouting of UNSC resolutions would leave the UN even more impotent than it is now.

13. The US would not have Iran bordered by US allies to the East and West.

14. As Richard Clarke noted, Osama may well have “boogied to Baghdad” after theTaliban was removed from power.

15. The 500 tons of yellowcake that Saddam had stockpiled would be in the process of being converted into nuclear weapons material.

16. Lots of terrorists would still be alive.

17. An odious regime would still be killing its citizens.

18. Saddam’s loathsome sons would still be in line to take over.

The costs of invading Iraq include:

1. The US has lost over 2000 good men and women.

2. The US has spent a lot of money on the war.

3. The war has made the US unpopular with Muslims outside of Iraq and Afghanistan.

4. The war has split the US domestically when it needs to be united.

5. The war has made the US unpopular in Europe.

6. Parts of Iraq are still beset by sectarian violence.

7. The left wing of the Democratic party has taken over the party and condemned it to the political wilderness.

Two more things to ponder:

Does anyone think Saddam would stand idle while Iran built nuclear weapons?

After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the United States attacked the Vichy French in North Africa in its first offensive action of WW2. Heck, the French had lost their colonies in the Far East to the Japs. Why hit them? Simple answer: because the US could and because it weakened the Axis. If you accept that the West is once again fighting the expansionist forces of Islam in a war that has waxed and waned over the centuries, then driving a stake into the heart of the Middle East makes strategic sense. If you think that Muslim terrorism is a minor annoyance and the terrorists are little more than common criminals, then Iraq looks like a mistake.

Advertisements