Do you still think it was wise to attack Iraq instead of focus on Afganistan only.?

Question

The 'war' in Iraq could spill over to strive in neighboring countries and could be the start of WWIII. But the war in Afganistan was justified for 9/11 and is not in danger of engulfing the world.

In retrospect would you agree that the Iraqi war should not have started at all?

Answer 1

I have always felt that the recent “Iraq War” should not have started at all. America did not have the international backing to do so and did not have a proper post-invasion plan that could have prevented the sectarian violence going on. Sun Tzu, one of the greatest military thinkers in history, always stressed the importance of alliances. A country must have alliances to be strong (even if it’s the sole superpower in the world, but even a superpower can be trumped by non-conventional enemies ie Soviet-Afghan War) and it must deny the enemy alliances. Instead, by attacking Iraq, we actually strengthened the enemy by letting chaos occur (fall of the Baa’th government, riots, looting, etc afterwards). States are hard to build, as we can see from Germany and Japan, and to take one down is easier to do. Terrorists thrive in chaos, and Al Qaeda flocked to Iraq to take advantage of it. Along with the overly military answer, the US aided the growth of the insurgency by using the conventional heavy firepower causing discontent in the population. Combined with the fire fanning of Al Qaeda and the already existing differences between the Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis, this made for a lethal stew that led to the mess we are facing today. America never had the proper strategy to fight a non-conventional enemy such as Al-Qaeda because it had been born and raised in an era where non-conventional enemies (non-state entities) did not hold a monopoly over war. But this century signals the change where the battlefield will be shared between state armed forces and non-state entities (ie, Private Military Companies, Al Qaeda, etc.)

America had the support of the international community after 9/11 to attack those who openly supported Al Qaeda, which was Afghanistan. Hence, Afghanistan was an acceptable war and we had a good thing going. However, shifting forces to Iraq and thinking that the fall of the Taliban would simply lead to total defeat of the Taliban was a big mistake. Basically, America did not finish the job in Afghanistan before moving on to another country. Full stability and legitimacy of the Afghan government should have been achieved. And now some will say that after WWII, the US helped both Japan and Germany to their feet and look how it turned out. To that, I would have to answer that the dynamics were different. Both countries were thoroughly exhausted and devastated by years of warfare and looked to the support of the West for help. The atmosphere in Iraq and Afghanistan are different; they did not for the most part want the West to come rushing in and staying due to their well-placed suspicions about colonialism which was a big part of their history. Bringing Western ideas and values into traditional societies also offer social and political troubles as well. To illustrate farther: can you imagine not having a distinction between religion and the state in the US? What if someone came along and imposed a theocracy in the US? How would you feel?

Answer 2

Uh where were you 6 years ago...we attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan right after 9/11! The attack in Iraq didn't come until 2 years later.

Answer 3

Absolutely not. Probably the worst thing we could have done.
It would have made sense to invade Saudi Arabia. This is where most of the hijackers came from. I am not 100 percent convinced invading Afghanistan was the right thing to do, but it made far more sense than attacking, invading and occupying Iraq and now we are paying the price of being misled into a bogus war.

Answer 4

Iraq was attacked for strictly economic reasons in my opinion. They would not get with the program on oil production even under the oil for food program. The US planed a quick takeover and a rapid return to a state of normalcy with the flow of oil being limited to what OPEC wanted. However, due to the incompetence of the civilian leadership of the US, we put our foot in it. Now we are stuck in the middle of a civil war with no good end in sight. Our ex Secretary of Defense should have been hung not just fired.

Answer 5

It was the stupidest thing Bush could do. It should not have started. Would you tell me how are afghanistan and iraq related? Ok, Afghanistan is justifies but Iraq. Innocent people are butchered daily because of this war. The US should not have intervened like it always does.

Answer 6

Iraq was attacked by the U.S. because Saddamn rejoiced the Sept 11 attacks. Bush wants saddam to step down because of his foolishness like killing his enemies, stealing the money of the people, hatred for the americans, chemical weapons, etc. Bush just wants to give the iraqi people their freedom. people die because of freedom. sept 11 was one of many reasons why there is a war in iraq and afghanistan. you cant just watch a crime happening you must act to stop it. this is what bush did. So we must all thank Bush for his goodness.

Answer 7

No. If you go back to the years leading up to the war, the issue was debated in Congress, in the US media, all over the country in the US, and in the United Nations. There were dozens of reasons behind the decision to go to war. The fear of losing was not a reason to stay out of Iraq.

All wars are costly in terms of lives and property. It is the price we have to pay for freedom.

Answer 8

Was it wise? No, it probably wasn't.
Did it seem like a good idea at the time? Yes it did.
Did Saddam pose as a threat? Yes, he tried everything to look as one.

Answer 9

We were working off intelligence that was incorrect. If the intelligence had been different we would not have gone to war. Easy question.

Answer 10

I never thought it was wise. It was, is and always will be an illegal war fought for immoral reasons.