|
I probably shouldn't have made this so open ended, but let's see where it takes us. I think aceventura3's point is not that Iraq per se attacked us but that it was a part of the "war on terror". Basically a battle in a greater justified war that was first recognized with the September 11th terrorist attacks. Not necessarily so much focused on Iraq, but trying to see a bigger picture that perhaps this is only a small step into a much grander and more focused plan; the focus being the safety of Americans and the American nation from unfriendly nations.
At least that's what I get, ace you can correct me if I’m wrong.
All right I understand your point, but I’m not convinced, the facts being that Iraq has never been truly connected with the war on terror, perhaps on some level there is the argument that Iraq will bring democracy to the middle east. This is a position that is just plain uninformed, no one can know that this is what will happen.
I guess the pejorative statements against the war can be summed up in: Being in Iraq has nothing to do with the defense of America and the premises upon which we agreed to go into Iraq were categorically wrong.
|