aico you are not the only one conserned.

Sometimes it is pointless to argue with people who are confrintational and can only see down one path.

Iraq is not the agenda any more it is a tactical point. there are other countries that are more of a consern. Location is always a big key in domination. The war in Iraq has become a reason to locate forces there.
People have a tendency to miss motive when there is a lot of underlying issues.
The end result of all of this will be devistating.. not good

which won't happen until the draft is reinstated

So are you saying the troops are there to keep Iran under check?

Saddam was doing that a lot more effectively than the US will. And the "Nuclear threat" from Iran is also countered by Israel.

There to defend/control the oil?

Oil is important, but whether the coalition comes out of this with a steady supply of Iraqi oil is a gamble. Don't think it's working out that way and I personally do not see some Iraqis allowing it.

Let's face it Bush and Blair thought this was going to be a lot easier than it is. Should they have realised they would be taking on such a big task? Yes, as leaders, eager to go to war, that is their job.

Should they have realised the hatred that would be engineered against the West for invading a country on false reasons? Yes, again that is their jobs.

One President had a plaque on his desk that said "The buck stops here." It still applies.

There might be other reasons for the invasion that will come out in 50 years time, such as Saudi Arabia. But on what we know today it was a big mistake and continues to be a big mistake that gets worse.

Can someone else please tell me where I backtracked, or contradicted myself? Cuz I honestly don't see it, but I am one sided, so I might be missing it. Either I am crazy or there is another aico posting and I have him/her on ignore. I am serious, point it out to me if you see it.