|
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i hear what your saying but our form of government/free market ideals would make that impossible. |
ok that was an extreme example, but the us should have pursued a policy of exchange not embargo. the embargo had the positive effect of not allowing saddam from obtaining wmds, but it also created a dire situation (poverty/starvation) and hatred toward the us. the effects of which probably have impacted the resistance toward the occupation.
think of the goodwill that could have been created and what could have been avoided. the us policy of engagement similar to that employed elsewhere should have been employed here too. personally, i think the president was not sufficiently impartial to make any decisions regarding iraq.
in sum, i think firm and goal-oriented engagement would have been a preferable alternative to the actual policy which in my view was more disengagement and with a humanitarian trade bandage, as an afterthought. for this clinton bears a lot of reponsibility too, not just bush.
|