Didn't Bush have full support in the attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan yet blew it by invading Iraq?

Question

The entire US and every other country in the world supported Bush's move against the Taliban. Even Islamic led nations were on board. So why did Bush snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory? Also, why do neo-cons support Bush dismantling the support the US had?

Pashmina Army (below) Disagree. Yes the Taliban is not AL-Q. The Taliban provided a safe haven for OBL and would not hand him over. This prompted the attack on the Taliban.

Lillian (below) True yet not true. The so called allies that were bribed into the Iraq occupation barely had troops involved AND few, if any (other than the UK) were on the front lines taking casualties.

Answer 1

They had a decades-old preconceived notion of what the Middle East should look like, with economic interests being the most important factor. They decided to put their plan into place when they received the opportunity post-9/11. Afghanistan, I'm sure, wasn't part of the big picture and they quickly lost interest there.

The shame of the whole situation is that they allied themselves with nations that are responsible for Islamic terrorism, like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and lied (deceived, whatever) their way into Iraq. Iran seems to be part two of their misguided plan.

.

Answer 2

Yes, contrary to the Iraq war, the Afghan war has a U.N. mandate with strong international consensus and support. Most importantly, the Afghan people supported the war and welcomed U.S. and NATO forces.

Unfortunately the American decision makers considered Afghanistan secured and attacked Iraq (hoping for two birds in one shot), which was not mandated by the U.N. and a majority of the world community. Many observers and friends of America were shocked by the American decision to attack Iraq while the outcome of the war in Afghanistan was not clear. Attacking Iraq before stabilizing Afghanistan, didn't make sense to anyone with basic knowledge about the region in question.

Attacking Iraq was very negative for U.S.' image and a disaster for the U.S. efforts in Afghanistan, the "war on terror" , catching Osama bin Laden and neutralising al-Qaeda in the region.

Most of the resources were diverted to Iraq. Afghanistan was a forgotten war even though the U.S. administraton declared victory in that war.

The Iraq war will have very negative, short and long term, consequences for America.
The immidiate negative effects of the war in Iraq:
1. The war in Afghanistan has become a big mess
2. There is no functioning government, no law&order in Afghanistan.
3. Osama bin Laden is still freeq
4. al-Qaeda is stronger than before the war
5. The regime in Iran became stronger and gained from both wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, where Iran's influence is increasing.

Still, the U.S. can affored to lose a war in Iraq, which is already lost and impossible to win.
But the U.S. and for that matter the West can not affored to lose the war in Afghanistan. I don't want to imagine the consequences.

Answer 3

Bush also blew a ton of world-wide goodwill after 9/11 as well-many Middle Eastern countries were upset over what happened here as well. Now? After Iraq and the posturing about Iran, we're a great target for anyone in the Middle East or anywhere else who is Muslim or Anti-American with a violent agenda.

Answer 4

Bush is a neo-con, although he may be so clueless as to not know that, so he went along with the neo-con plan to invade Iraq and set up a democracy in Arabia. Yes, he blew it by invading Iraq well before Afghanistan was reconstructed. I still can't believe that there are so many idiots who support W. after all his failures. there is a group, called something like, "Progress for an American Century" that espouses the neo-con plan.

Answer 5

Iraq has continually f*cked with the U. S.. the explanation why Bush despatched our Troops to Iraq grew to become into to do away with suspects linked with Bin weighted down after 9-11 and to objective to unfastened the Iraqi human beings of the dictator, Saddam Hussein, who's accepted for using the 1st weaponized gas...on his very own human beings. It grew to become into additionally for procuring distant places oil for the U. S., wherein Pres. Bush made thousands and thousands.

Answer 6

Yes,even Iran helped us overthrow the Taliban. Too bad Bush made the "axis of evil" speech and helped Ahminejad(a hardline conservative) get elected.

added. Pashmina,the taliban did like al qaeda for fighting against the northern alliance,before that they were not too impressed with them.

Answer 7

yes he did.makes you wonder why we hear so much about the Iraq war and not a lot about bin Ladden.could it be because he;s friends with the bush;s still.we had bin Ladden at least twice in our sights yet let him go.really makes you wonder why.was bin Ladden behind the world trade center or were we just told that to have an excuse to go to war in Iraq.we are;nt doing much to catch bin Ladden.he;s keeping a low profile these days.how come we could catch Saddam but can;t catch Ladden.got to have something to do with the oil fields.well at least that;s what i think.to many wrong things here in the picture.

Answer 8

Pretty much. We still had around 35 puppet governments will to contribute monkeys to test for land mines and stuff as long as we gave them lots of money. But you miss the point. As far as Presidents go George Bush was very poor. He was able to transfer billions of dollars to his friends and family by direct transfers with no bids that would have never been allowed without the fog of war. Furthermore, by having his parents invest in oil companies at the right time his tripling of the value of a gallon of gas was brilliant. I think he should get the Nobel prize for economics for his overseeing the largest expansion of the US economy in history that produced no increase in wages. Brilliant!!!

Answer 9

Neocons (Israel) wanted Saddam taken out. They believe the U.S. should control the U.N., not kowtow to it.

Much worldwide goodwill toward the U.S. was lost when Bush appointed Paul Wolfowitz as President of the World Bank. Wolfowitz then immediately withheld World Bank funding to Uzbekistan for denying the U.S. permission to launch air assaults on Iraq from Uzbek soil. This ploy demonstrated to those 35 nations of the willing what could happen to them if they dared cross Bush.

Answer 10

Even that has problems. Taliban and Alqaeda or not the same or even friends.

It is like attacking Peoria because Al Capone is bootlegging whiskey in Chicago.

It's all close but no Cigar