by Well, after the news about the American soldiers killing a van full of women and children, it’s time to ask if we should be in Iraq. It’s nice to live in a place where we can ask such questions, isn’t it? What’s the answer? Hell if I know.
A reasonable person has to assume that George W and company have more information that someone like myself, who knows next to nothing. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the information does indeed point to a credible threat against the U.S.A. from Sodamn Insane. But logic doesn’t always govern the government, does it? If it did, we’d have a balanced budget and no federal deficit, wouldn’t we?
If there is no credible threat, there 5/be other equally valid reasons for invading Iraq. Again, logic would indicate that these reasons give the U.S. a return on investment greater than the cost of the war, rebuilding Iraq, and defending ourselves against the next wave of Islamic lunacy that’s sure to follow.
Estimates for this cost run from $50 billion to $200 billion, depending on who does the counting and for what.
That’s a boatload of bucks! Here’s the only problem I have with what the U.S. is doing: I guarantee that $100 billion dollars could end our problem with the Middle East forever. How, you ask? Simple research and development, baby! What’s the only reason we take crap from Saudi Arabia? Duh, oil. Spend $50 billion researching the fuel cell engine and see what happens. Some dude way smarter than me will make a fortune and the rest of us can tell Sheik Thanks-a-lot to piss up a rope. Heck, I just saved $50 billion.
It’s easy enough to analyze it this way. The President must have a more important and rewarding agenda in mind.
The fact that some innocents were killed in Iraq is tragic, but not a decisive factor. Sodamn has and will continue to deliberately kill far more of his own people that we will inadvertently in our efforts to set up a new government.
