Well, the point Monty, was not so much what the war was started for, but what the war stands for right now.
Right now it's about trying to bring order, stability and freedom (it's a very, VERY daunting task) to a chaos basket that was held together only by Saddam's tyranny. Right now the opponents of this are really street thugs. Don't be fooled into thinking those insurgents are fighting to liberate Iraq. They are not. They are simply trying to drive out the Americans so that they can rule their little piece of turf not dissimilar to street gangs. These people rely on America being out and a state of chaos ensuing otherwise well, if it's safe, who would bother to look to a gang for protection (a big chunk of gang income)?
That's what the mission is now.
I think the whole going into Iraq was debated like h3ll in here. And I think the charge that it was "illegal" is extremely ambiguous. I think all sides messed up badly in the runup to the war. Also remember, WMDs were actually just one part of the whole argument, but of course the one that got sensationalized both in the UN and in the press. There were other violations of 1441 that Saddam violated that the UN turned a blind eye to.
Back to the point. It's a different fight now. And as long as the politicians don't suddenly back up on their words, the soldiers still have a chance to keep theirs.
staurofilakes said:
Yes, but in the real world where I live people have to front reality but looking to certain basic rules,called human rights.
We live in a globalizated world and the reality that you think is only yours affects the hole world.People that were in Abu Ghraib also had their own reality and their own world and I can imagine that they do not have good feelings concerning the US, this people will teach Hate to US to their sons,and this ones to their sons and so go on... and this hate will become their reality. If US argument to attack Irak was to liberate their people and give freedom( where are the MDW´s ?) I guess that the methods that you are using there are not very consecuent with your porpouses.
Listen. I don't think you get it. Those who were involved in that abuse scandal have been dealt with either by court martial or by pretty much forcing them to retire (which by the way is a big deal). I think more than "reality" what you mean is perspective.
Those people who were in Abu Grahib as prisoners were not the people waving hello to be liberated anyways. Those guys are the thugs who are trying to kick America out so that they can control their little gang turf. You know the type. The most famous of those would be Mohamed Fara Aidid (Somalia). So don't make such a big deal out of it. American soldiers faced the consequences even when mistreating criminals.
WMDs were an early objective, probably the primary objective, but bringing freedom to the Iraqis was also a key objective... though it wasn't planned well enough.
