Saddam Hussein was just a punk
Posted by aogThursday, 30 September 2004 at 22:30 TrackBack Ping URL

Listening to the debate and the two candidates arguing about Saddam Hussein and whether he was a threat, I realized that I didn’t really care. It’s not just that it’s water under the bridge, but that I didn’t care all that much at the time. The local problem was the Ba’ath regime, a regime that is naturally ruled by someone like Saddam Hussein. Beyond that, we’re really at war with the caliphascists, the forces that are striving to bring back the Caliphate (which includes both secular Ba’athists and hard core jihadis). Personalizing the war to Osama bin Laden or even just Al Qaeda shows (to me) a fundamental misunderstanding of the dangers facing the USA.

I suppose this is the key fault point for the pro-invasion vs. anti-invasion. To me, the invasion of Iraq was an excellent choice for bringing the war home to the enemy. There’s only one exit strateg that makes sense for American security interests, and that’s leaving when the caliphascists are a broken and discredited force. We’re nowhere near that yet, but we certainly need to be working on it. Iraq is now the primary battle ground where we are contesting the future with the caliphascists, but it’s not the only one. However, if Kerry can’t see how Iraq fits in I doubt he’ll figure out the rest of it.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
Tom Friday, 01 October 2004 at 08:17

And still no one is talking about why Kerry insists that our Iraq coalition is worthless, weak and inadequate, while he simutaneously demands the utter dismantling of our N. Korea coalition.

Annoying Old Guy Friday, 01 October 2004 at 21:05

Yeah, I think President Bush missed some opportunities there. It was definitely an off night for him.

End of Discussion