3 ms·

It's the politician's syllogism: - We must do something - This is something - Therefore, we must do this. After 9/11 the US had to do something, Afghanistan

It's the politician's syllogism: - We must do something - This is something - Therefore, we must do this. After 9/11 the US had to do something, Afghanistan wasn't enough, so do Iraq.

adventured 8y ago
They did Iraq right with Afghanistan because they had the war machine out of the box and the population revved up to allow it. If they had waited, the public and Congress would have been against it. Obama tested the waters for doing a larger war with Syria in 2013 (which would have attempted to ensure the removal of al-Assad), too much time had passed since 9/11 and people were very war weary by then. With almost no support for more big wars Congress shot it down and Obama abruptly backed down. Sept 2013: "Obama Seeks Approval by Congress for Strike in Syria" https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/syria.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/syria.ht...
RobertoG 8y ago
So, they choose Iraq randomly? The idea of 'doing something' about Iraq was a lot older. 9/11 was just the excuse. When you read about the subject it's interesting to realize how many people in Washington was against that war, including the Pentagon and the State Department, but powerful interest prevailed. From https://www.haaretz.com/1.4764706 https://www.haaretz.com/1.4764706: "Is the Iraq war the great neoconservative war? It's the war the neoconservatives wanted, Friedman says. It's the war the neoconservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite. Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened. Still, it's not all that simple, Friedman retracts [..]"
- arethuza 8y ago
  I agree, definitely not random - it was sitting on the shelf waiting for someone to find an excuse to "do" it: "Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes the politically inevitable." Milton Friedman
profalseidol 8y ago
They already did something before 9/11 and I think that was a retaliation against an attack to a US embassy. And list goes on.

It's the politician's syllogism: - We must do something - This is something - Therefore, we must do this. After 9/11 the US had to do something, Afghanistan wasn't enough, so do Iraq.

adventured 8y ago

They did Iraq right with Afghanistan because they had the war machine out of the box and the population revved up to allow it. If they had waited, the public and Congress would have been against it. Obama tested the waters for doing a larger war with Syria in 2013 (which would have attempted to ensure the removal of al-Assad), too much time had passed since 9/11 and people were very war weary by then. With almost no support for more big wars Congress shot it down and Obama abruptly backed down. Sept 2013: "Obama Seeks Approval by Congress for Strike in Syria" https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/syria.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/syria.ht...

RobertoG 8y ago

So, they choose Iraq randomly? The idea of 'doing something' about Iraq was a lot older. 9/11 was just the excuse. When you read about the subject it's interesting to realize how many people in Washington was against that war, including the Pentagon and the State Department, but powerful interest prevailed. From https://www.haaretz.com/1.4764706 https://www.haaretz.com/1.4764706: "Is the Iraq war the great neoconservative war? It's the war the neoconservatives wanted, Friedman says. It's the war the neoconservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite. Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened. Still, it's not all that simple, Friedman retracts [..]"

arethuza 8y ago
I agree, definitely not random - it was sitting on the shelf waiting for someone to find an excuse to "do" it: "Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes the politically inevitable." Milton Friedman

profalseidol 8y ago

They already did something before 9/11 and I think that was a retaliation against an attack to a US embassy. And list goes on.