Ninjamom, I wasn't trying to oversimplify at all ( and I know you wouldn't pick a fight! :ubercool: ).
In Iraq the situation before we invaded the first time wasn't what we would consider ideal, a dictator in charge, very limited human rights, secret police and some sectarian violence. Not, for us, a good place to live BUT and it is a big but, Iraq did allow more freedoms than many countries around it. There were more freedoms for Christians, women and people of other religions than there are in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iran and other Gulf states. The sectarian violence was kept in check by draconian methods but it did mean that the suicide and other bombings didn't happen as they do now. More people, civilians, die now in Iraq than ever did under Saddam. Without debating the rights and wrongs on invading Iraq, it is a fact that can't be denied. The invasion of Iraq has allowed the terrorist groups more freedom to bomb. They didn't have this freedom under Saddam.
It's the same situation as in the former Yugoslavia, there was no sectarian violence there under the dictator Tito as he kept a tight hold on the country, when he died and the country fell apart there were massacres everywhere. There's an interesting debate there on dictatorships v democracy!
It's a self evident fact that if our troops weren't there they wouldn't be killed.
Bombing is not such a precise art as perhaps the governments would like you to think, if it were we wouldn't have friendly fire incidents. civilians get bombed accidentally if not by design. Sometimes though it's deemed politic to bomb civilian targets to lower morale. Remember America has never signed the Geneva convention. I don't think we should ever lose sight of the fact that we have politicians and some military who are every bit as ruthless as the leaders of the terrorists groups. Remember the Basra Road in the first Gulf War.. Again whether that is good or bad is debatable.
In Iraq the situation before we invaded the first time wasn't what we would consider ideal, a dictator in charge, very limited human rights, secret police and some sectarian violence. Not, for us, a good place to live BUT and it is a big but, Iraq did allow more freedoms than many countries around it. There were more freedoms for Christians, women and people of other religions than there are in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iran and other Gulf states. The sectarian violence was kept in check by draconian methods but it did mean that the suicide and other bombings didn't happen as they do now. More people, civilians, die now in Iraq than ever did under Saddam. Without debating the rights and wrongs on invading Iraq, it is a fact that can't be denied. The invasion of Iraq has allowed the terrorist groups more freedom to bomb. They didn't have this freedom under Saddam.
It's the same situation as in the former Yugoslavia, there was no sectarian violence there under the dictator Tito as he kept a tight hold on the country, when he died and the country fell apart there were massacres everywhere. There's an interesting debate there on dictatorships v democracy!
It's a self evident fact that if our troops weren't there they wouldn't be killed.
Bombing is not such a precise art as perhaps the governments would like you to think, if it were we wouldn't have friendly fire incidents. civilians get bombed accidentally if not by design. Sometimes though it's deemed politic to bomb civilian targets to lower morale. Remember America has never signed the Geneva convention. I don't think we should ever lose sight of the fact that we have politicians and some military who are every bit as ruthless as the leaders of the terrorists groups. Remember the Basra Road in the first Gulf War.. Again whether that is good or bad is debatable.
