Actually, Saddam Hussein had been destabilizing the region long before we got there. Care to debate actual history with me?
When he started killing the Kurds and invading Iran and gassing his own people, the entire region was a tinderbox. All it did was draw the attention of major world powers. You could say it destabilized the world for a time.
There are many unstable areas of the world. In my opinion, whatever Saddam was doing didn't justify the deaths of 4,800 US servicemen/women and $1-2 trillion in our tax money dumped into war businesses.
Also I felt like they (media, politicians) used the 9/11 tragedy as an insincere means to get Americans to back an Iraqi invasion (given that Saddam had no connection). I felt like they knew that the American people were primed for war and manipulated them into attacking a target that really had nothing to do with the thing that primed them for war in the first place.
I didn't like that.
There are many unstable areas of the world. In my opinion, whatever Saddam was doing didn't justify the deaths of 4,800 US servicemen/women and $1-2 trillion in our tax money dumped into war businesses.
So, that's like saying (Godwin's law shall now be in effect) whatever Hitler was doing to the Jews and Europe, didn't justify the millions of allied deaths and insane spending by FDR in the 1940's.
Also I felt like they (media, politicians) used the 9/11 tragedy as an insincere means to get Americans to back an Iraqi invasion (given that Saddam had no connection). I felt like they knew that the American people were primed for war and manipulated them into attacking a target that really had nothing to do with the thing that primed them for war in the first place.
This merits some consideration. Although, what were we going to do, sit there a moan like a child after being punched by the bully in the schoolyard when something like that happens? Bush wanted to finish his father's work, while also taking down the actual people who committed that heinous act.