4 ms·

In 2003-13 I never would have said this but it sure looks like Iraq came out better. Neither came out great but both are stable, Iraq is not destabilizing the

In 2003-13 I never would have said this but it sure looks like Iraq came out better. Neither came out great but both are stable, Iraq is not destabilizing the region and Afghanistan isn't harboring people who want to attack the west and have the capability to. That said, we never should have invaded Iraq and we probably could have accomplished what we accomplished in Afghanistan and more had we more seriously pursued diplomatic options in 2001.

Zach_the_Lizard 3y ago
For Afghanistan, I think the use of special forces and the like to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda terrorists would have been expedient. We got him in Pakistan even after all the trouble to invade and occupy Afghanistan. Throw in some shock and awe on Taliban forces if we wanted to make more of a point, I suppose. The mood in 2001 was one where diplomacy was impossible short of unconditionally handing over everyone in Al Qaeda to the US.
- dsfyu404ed 3y ago
  >The mood in 2001 was one where diplomacy was impossible short of unconditionally handing over everyone in Al Qaeda to the US. That wasn't an unreasonable request all things considered. We should have tried much harder to get the Taliban to accept that deal. They needed to look like more legitimate government with a stronger grip on power. We needed Al Qaeda. It should have been an easy deal to make. Marketing it would have been harder. We've made the same deal a dozen times before. It's not like we didn't have the playbook ready to go. All we had to do was translate the end user guides from Spanish and replace "commies" with "Al Qaeda". Obviously the details would have needed to be hammered out but it's not like the precedent wasn't there.