Where would the U.S. be today if we had just kept flying the no fly zone in Iraq and waited for the U.N.?

Question

This question has been bugging me. Way beack when people were complaining about the cost of the no fly zone and look at where we are now! We could keep a strong presance in Afghanistan and possible capture Osma Bin Laden and still come out probably on the cheaper end of the deal.

Answer 1

We'd be in a lot better place. The US would still have clout and respect in the world, 2545 US service men and women would still be alive, 18,777 US troops would not have been wounded and maimed, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis would still be alive and well and we could have contained SH. BTW, the price of gas would still be below $1.50/ gallon.

Answer 2

osama bin laden is not in Iraq he is the dude who masterminded 911 ok. afganistan is occupied by the us because the taliban wrecked the place and allowed terrorists to train and prolifirate there.no problem.....
Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction the way i see it the majority of the population were not in power the sadam regime would have toppled without the western world interfereing It would have taken a lot longer but as others have said no dead US service men and women no dead iraqis by western hands we would be the good guys still, oil diesel and gas still affordable the primeminister of GB Tony Blair would still have some shred of integrity left. thats only maybes .... what can we do now to rectify the situation. Immediate and total withdrawl of all non Iraqi personal. if the whole place goes up like a powder keg the we will have to deal with it . but really all that can happen is the iraqis will have their uprising the majority will prevail.oil might go up more but hey whats new. But more importantly our people will be out of harms way. they would have clubbed Sadams mob anyway for what they did we just made it possible for them to be a little softer under world public eyes.

Answer 3

Um well I guess we would be bothering some other country
like North Korea or Iran. But I guess we are better of in Iraq because entering North Korea or Iran would be a much difficult
situation. Both countries have an airforce and missiles and are
capable of defending themselves. They would be much difficult
to handle then Iraq with its weak military force wiped out within 2 years of war. And plus bugging North Korea means nuclier war and handeling North Korea alone would probably take the U.S.A
8 years of combat and plenty of casualties both to marines and
civilians in the U.S.A and worst of all China would get in the picture defending North Korea so chances of victory would
be very slim. To handle Iran alone it would take 5 years for the
U.S since they have a much capable military then Iraq and
an Airforce. But like North Korea china and Russia will defend
Iran so victory might not be certain at all so Im glad the U.S.A
chose to bug Iraq.

Answer 4

Oil may be cheaper because none of Iraq's capacity would have been damaged.

Iraq would continue to supply money to suicide bombers in Palestine. He may even fire Scuds at Israel in response to the attacks going on now.

Saddam would be backing Syria and Iran in all of the stuff going on right now.

Kofi Anon would continue to profit from selling missiles to Iraq under the oil for food program. Surprise Surprise they would not pass an agreement to go in.

Right now Saddam would have a room full of 14 year old girls raped while their fathers watched so they would know that their families would be shamed before he had the fathers beheaded for "suggesting" that Saddam made a bad policy or was not the best leader for Iraq.

Answer 5

Almost 3000 more live citizens, 500 billion dollars we could spend on our shores, less hate from the rest of the world, etc etc

One thing that amazes me is the number of people who think this is related to 911. People - remember we are at war in Afghanistan too. That was in respect to 911 and we have neglected that front so we can search for non existent WM in a country that had done nothing to us except maybe annoy Bush.

Answer 6

We'd be exactly where we were before the run-up to the war... Before we gave Saddam the needed time to conceal and move his little operations underground and out of country.

A "no-fly zone" cannot shut down a rape room.

Answer 7

this idea is out of consideration i think; because as you know Us's act against Iraq was a 'preemptive strike'. if us would be to wait for un or sthg else, then there would be no need to those of war, deads, injureds, lose of prestige, disrespect of international law and un, multiplied hatred to us etc......... but simply a preemptive strike requires attacking a potential enemy that you think possibly will damage/attack you in the future.

Answer 8

We'd be flying the no fly zone and waiting for the UN

Answer 9

Still waiting for the United Nothing to do something.

Answer 10

If we waited for the UN, as we did, we'd still be waiting and the French president would be much richer.