Submitted by Fred Lapides(United States), Oct 24, 2004 at 20:21
Sir -- I believe that you are mistaken. Had Bush not invaded Iraq -- an invasion setting a precedent for (say) Iran to attack Israel etc--we would have maintained what we have long had: One country (Iraq) neutralizing another threat--Iran.
Now we have lost over a thousand troops, ... lost any semblence of support from the Muslim world-wide community, and allowed Iran to go ahead making nukes.
We will not take on Iran--indeed we are totally bogged down now in Iraq--and Iran is thumbing its nose at the world. They are now the big strategic threat in the region (as Israel knew before the Iraq invasion), and Bush has blown it all...
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.