# Future of Iraq without US invasion **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 3, 2006, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039 "2006-04-03T07:04:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2006, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/21 "2006-04-04T20:51:38Z")
> [@pmwgreen](#): > > Just to note, we are talking about a book Scott Ritter wrote in 1999 and which was republished in the fall of 2002, right? Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/22 "2006-04-05T05:33:36Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > How come it’s never too late to insist that invasion was wrong, but it’s too late to ask what else could have been done? My personal opinion? It’ll never be too late to insist that invasion was wrong until those responsible are actually held responsible in some meaningful way. As far as asking what could’ve been done? It’s not that it’s too late to ask, but that the tenor of the questioning always comes across (to me, at least) as either a defense or an apology for the collosal fuck-up. > [@](#): > > What if there was a solution nobody could see? If such solution could be discovered, perhaps it might help to improve the present situation. There’s a line somewhere between attempting to figure out what might’ve been an alternative “solution” and just being a partisan mouthpiece stepping up in defense of Bush’s actions. Until recently, I’ve been so overwhelmed with the latter that I’ve not been privy to a discussion that was the former. Perhaps that’s due, to a large extent, to the rancor between critics and defenders (deliberately fostered by Bush and friends, IMO). Personally, I think it’s a poisoned well, with a half-life measured in presidential terms. I also think there’s little or no valid hindsight justification for what Bush did. In addition, I think there’s not much chance of discovering a way to “improve” the situation by thinking up other “solutions” – after all, they’ll have little or no bearing on the current situation (but may be fodder for a Newt Gingrich book in a decade or two). If wishes were horses, and all that… > [@](#): > > But if you insist to put the past behind us, I offer what I think is the best assessment is: it was a horrible situation, the invasion didn’t improve it much, what now? And that’s fine, I suppose, but that’s not the thread you started. > [@](#): > > And I accepted that argument. To be honest, I unsubscribed from that thread somewhere early in page 2. However, I’m glad to hear that something was resolved. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/23 "2006-04-05T05:36:34Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I don’t understand the criticism toward this thread. I’ve been thinking about starting just such a thread for quite some time, and I find it to be one of the most interesting topics on the subject of Iraq. Best of luck with that one. (And I mean that.) If you do start such a beast, might I suggest that you frame it a bit differently? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/24 "2006-04-05T05:46:42Z")
> [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > Best of luck with that one. (And I mean that.) If you do start such a beast, might I suggest that you frame it a bit differently? Mainly my interest is exploring the idea that the way we ended the 1st Gulf War was not a sustainable long term solution. I’ve never been an advocate of the Iraq War waged by Bush II, but I have to think there was a better way of wrapping things up the first time around. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/25 "2006-04-05T05:50:38Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Mainly my interest is exploring the idea that the way we ended the 1st Gulf War was not a sustainable long term solution. I’ve never been an advocate of the Iraq War waged by Bush II, but I have to think there was a better way of wrapping things up the first time around. Given the politics going on behind the scenes during the first gulf war I’d be interested in your thoughts on what Bush I COULD have done differently…that wouldn’t have shattered the whole coalition (especially the Arab/ME parts of it). Not being snide here…I’m really interested in your thoughts on this. For myself I don’t see anything major Bush I could have done differently. -XT ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/26 "2006-04-05T06:41:25Z")
> [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > As far as asking what could’ve been done? It’s not that it’s too late to ask, but that the tenor of the questioning always comes across (to me, at least) as either a defense or an apology for the collosal fuck-up. That is very interesting, because to me the tenor of those who insist that war was a huge mistake, appears to be uncompromisingly hysterical. > [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > And that’s fine, I suppose, but that’s not the thread you started. In my own words, ruling out the invasion, how the world and US should have dealt with Saddam? That was the subject of the thread I started. Besides much of veiled personal abuses, precious few people are brave enough to declare what they stand for so far. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/27 "2006-04-05T07:16:46Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > That is very interesting, because to me the tenor of those who insist that war was a huge mistake, appears to be uncompromisingly hysterical. Which doesn’t make their claims wrong, nor does it make attempts at justification right. > [@](#): > > In my own words, ruling out the invasion, how the world and US should have dealt with Saddam? That was the subject of the thread I started. But that’s a non-sequitor from what prompted my response. Never mind, though – from my first post in this thread, in _my_ own words, you need to make the case that (1) Saddam was actually dangerous, (2) had retained weapons capability, and (3) was strengthened in any meaningful way by the results of Gulf War I. In other words, “dealing with Saddam” implies (to me) that some pro-active steps were necessary. You can either posit the above three items as given – that mushroom clouds were indeed imminent – or you need to lay out the case. But it would be a red herring anyway, as it seems to me that the only point of reference you use to bolster your argument is the number of deaths under Saddam’s regime vs. the number of deaths due to the invasion. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 9:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/28 "2006-04-05T09:35:28Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > In my own words, ruling out the invasion, how the world and US should have dealt with Saddam? That was the subject of the thread I started… Kept buying his oil and told Israel to fight its own wars. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/29 "2006-04-05T15:50:36Z")
> [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > …you need to make the case that (1) Saddam was actually dangerous, (2) had retained weapons capability, and (3) was strengthened in any meaningful way by the results of Gulf War I. I chose not to. I offered assessment by Scott Ritter, who certainly can’t be called ‘Bush apologist’. If Ritter doesn’t make the case for you, fine. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/30 "2006-04-05T17:38:48Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > I chose not to. > > I offered assessment by Scott Ritter, who certainly can’t be called ‘Bush apologist’. If Ritter doesn’t make the case for you, fine. And as I said in my first post, I’ve not read his book and see little reason to blindly accept your (or his) premises. Besides, I seem to recall that Ritter was indeed criticized by some (both left and right) for changing his horse mid-stream. At any rate, to have a (meaningful) debate (not a Python-esque “argument”), people must first settle on accepted parameters; otherwise, it’s just people talking past one another. As you say, you’ve chosen not to do so; with that straightened out, I feel that my participation here has been nothing but nit-picking, which is tedious, mostly unproductive, unenjoyable, and for which I apologize. I’ll stop now. If and when **John Mace** starts that thread about Gulf War I, I expect he’ll lay out the terms of the debate pretty clearly. I may or may not participate in such a thread, but it should make for interesting reading. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2006, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/31 "2006-04-05T17:58:57Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Given the politics going on behind the scenes during the first gulf war I’d be interested in your thoughts on what Bush I COULD have done differently…that wouldn’t have shattered the whole coalition (especially the Arab/ME parts of it). That’s the conventional wisdom, but it doesn’t really matter if the question is what should we have done (as opposed to what could we have done). ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2006, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039/32 "2006-04-06T01:43:50Z")
> [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > And as I said in my first post, I’ve not read his book and see little reason to blindly accept your (or his) premises. Then I recommend you to buy and read Ritter’s book. > [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > Besides, I seem to recall that Ritter was indeed criticized by some (both left and right) for changing his horse mid-stream. After you finish reading Ritter’s book, perhaps you’ll understand his true position. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-iraq-without-us-invasion/351039.md?page=1)