If we had never invaded Iraq, would the world be a safer place today?

Question

Since Saddam was a mortal enemy of bin Laden, and he had no WMDs to give to anyone, he was no threat to us. He could have been turned just like Qaddafi.

Bush gave up on searching for bin Laden to invade Iraq so al Qaida is stronger and bigger and richer now than before 9/11 and the War in Iraq has destabilized the Middle East to the point that it is on the verge of spreading the war across borders.

Consider that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Answer 1

Saddam Hussein was a two-bit dictator who was pinned under constant U.S. air surveillance & surrounded by countries which didn't like him. Even Al Qaeda didn't like him (his government was far from their ideal of a Muslim state & he was an obstacle to such a state coming into being.) And he didn't have any of the specific WMDs that the Bush Administration claimed he had. He was no "imminent threat" to the U.S. He was a brutal dictator, yes, but the world is full of those (& the U.S. supports some of them.)

Had we just invaded Afghanistan & kept the coalition (and the international goodwill) we formed for that invasion intact, the world (or at least the U.S.) likely would be a safer place. It would be safer still if the U.S. worked for peace in the Israel-Palestinian conflict rather than blindly supporting anything Israel does as "anti-terrorism."

Answer 2

The invasion and occupation of Iraq, together with the daily bloodshed and suffering of the Iraqi people, have increased Islamic hatred and distrust of the US. It has been an excellent recruiting tool for Al Quada, and that organization is stronger than it ever was before 9/11. When Arabs see bodies, blood and devastation in Iraq on their televisions every night, they see America as the cause. Before they debate whether or not this is either "civil war" or "sectarian violence", they think that America is occupying this country while all this chaos has turned Iraq into hell on Earth.

The war in Iraq has made the world safer, but only for Al Quada and Islamic extremes ts. For the west, it has been a catastrophe on a nearly apocalyptic scale.

Answer 3

Of course not.
Before we invaded , we tried w/ limited success to get permission to fly over other middle east countries to attack Iraq.
Now we don't need anyone's permission, we now have air bases in the middle east where we can handle problems that might come up there. Isn't the mid. east the most sensible place to have a front to deal with terrorism offensively?
We have also killed or imprisoned thousands of terrorists or would-be terrorists, and right now they are killing each other faster than we ever did.
Even a small number of these extremists could have murdered many Americans, if they had managed to sneak into the U.S.
Don't allow yourself to forget that Saddam was becomming a hero to many Jihadists because he was defying the U.S., He may have become the leader who could unite them, and bring them into a "holy war". Even the extremist thought he had W.M.D.s that could be used against Americans.

Answer 4

Yes, Saddam was also our mortal enemy and it took an INVASION to stop him, there is absolutely NO proof that the WMD is not there.

I would have not liked my life to be gambled with in the way you are talking about. Thank God Bush was our president.

Answer 5

Yes, possibly. We need to work closely with moderate Muslim countries such as Jordan, Malaysia, Indonesia and other not so moderate ones such as Pakistan and Egypt. The war in Iraq has undermined our credibility with those countries and with the Muslim world in general. To paraphrase Collin Powell, we've lost some of the moral high ground because of what has transpired in Iraq. Nothing helps recruiters bring people in better than anger at a perceived enemy. That's true whether its the US military after 9/11 or Al Queada as a result Muslim outrage over the Iraq war.

Answer 6

It would have been a far more efficient use of our soldiers to station them at boarders and have them inspecting cargo at ports and airports. At least they would be more safe.

You might not even see my answer, because there were so many ahead of me, but I hope you do, because, I don't know about the world, but I think the U. S. would be safer and so would our military.

Answer 7

No. Probably not.

The world doesnt just magically stay a better place, its always trying to fall apart. We'd be just as messed up by now even if we hadnt gone into iraq.

We gave those damn people everything they needed to rally together and be a democracy... they just dont have the mentality for such a thing. Theyre too busy fighting with their neighbors, themselves, their leaders, and everyone else to band together and be united.

...kinda like the US has started to do within itself.

Answer 8

The world is neither safer nor less safe than it would have been had we not invaded. We would have kept more of our money and more of our resources. Less families would have been torn apart and less lives cut short. And we could have actually concentrated on our preexisting military responsibilities.

I have always been against the war from the beginning for this reason. It is useless to liberate a people not asking to be liberated. If Iraqis had been asking for our aid as the Sudanese living in Darfur are, then, yes, I would have supported the war despite knowing the cost (money and lives).

Answer 9

hard to say... would Saddam still be in power, yes. So, the crimes against the Iraqi people would still be continuing. Is the world safer? I doubt it.

To be quite frank the actions of the current administration makes me feel less safe. What is the next country that Bush would want to invade? And, what IF that country ACTUALLY had weapons of mass destruction.

Answer 10

What we are thinking, is what we are to do with them. they do no longer decide for to bypass to Israel, the different countries won't settle for them, so what to do? whether israel wasn't a secure place to stay, might we nevertheless be right here? confident. is los angelas secure? No. Do human beings nevertheless stay there regardless of that? confident. If one individual died in a inhabitants of one thousand million, might human beings nevertheless care approximately that one? besides the shown fact that a small subject, it relatively is our greatest one. whether we've the super protection stress, what are we meant to do with it? bypass via the west economic employer and kill all of us? of direction no longer.