@katiecouric: Mike Huckabee

Former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee sits down with Katie Couric to discuss whether he'll run in 2012, what he thinks about Sarah Palin, who will be the next GOP rock star and much more.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• cbsepisode
• katie
• couric

[chukmaty]

We learned from 9/11 that Iraq didn't need to have a huge standing army to be a threat. Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, and many other nations have governments that support terrorism directly.

Not every nation that fits that extremely broad criteria should be invaded, but with a nation like Iraq, were nothing seemed to work with them... it was an eventuality.

[chukmaty]

The UN was a corrupt body with its hand in the cookie jar with food for oil. The sooner we reform the UN or replace it with a better organization, the better.

And no, there are plenty of good reasons to invade a country other than the two ones you mentioned, what a naive person you are.

[DWDave67]

No that is reality. No I will agree on the arms race bit but that still is no excuse for our actions of unilateral action on the behalf on the UN without the UN's approval. Besides the fact it is wrong to invade another country on our own for anything besides an attack on us or our allies, the ROI is negative. Iraq was never a major threat to the US even at their worst. That is a fact. The 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion.

[chukmaty]

Lol, I think you confuse media focus on Iran as them gaining influence. Imagine the arms race that would be going on right now with Iran's recent nclear announcement if Saddam were still in power. Out of desperation he would have to arm himself if he hadn't already.

We will be reaping the dividends years from now, with Iraq the worst is past in an ordeal we would have faced to some extent someday. Iran has been a problem since Carter put the Mullahs in charge, we are paying for that today.

[DWDave67]

Well... we did...Iraq attacked Iran not the other way around. Now with our blunder in Iraq, Iran has more influence in the region than it ever did. Iraq not matter how you slice it was a dumb move on our part. Now we will be paying for this stupidity for decades.

[chukmaty]

9/11 changed our philosophy, we now see it as a better to deal with foreign policy threats directly instead of through allies we may not agree with. While more expensive, and more likely to lead people to resent us as a power and not just the country that makes good TV, it is better for almost everyone internationally.

Iraq and Afghanistan will both be better off when we leave them than when we came.

[chukmaty]

Also, I still do not think we provided chem weapons. It was a good idea at the time to help Saddam. History is littered with good nations having to make strange bed fellows. Iraq was close to France, always has been, so they were a natural barrier from Iran getting to the rest of the middle east.

It would have been worse for everyone if Iran had free reign of the region.

Also, we take more direct action now, back then it all had to be covert. 9/11 made it so direct action was acceptable.

[DWDave67]

But the reason for Iranian revolution in the first place is due to our interference with the elections in Iran in the 1950s and our continued support for the Shah until his exile. We could have saved ourselves alot of trouble if we butted out of thier affairs. That was a provokation.

[chukmaty]

The Iranian people do not hate us. They are the most pro American nation in the middle East. It is the government that gives us trouble. Us taking out Mossadegh was a very good thing for Iran. The Shah was a boyscout compared to the Mullahs. Carter made a huge blunder letting Khomeini take power.

We also would have made a huge mistake if we had not done something to counter balance the Iranian Mullahs, if they had become the uninhibited power broker in the region, screw life.

[DWDave67]

When you bomb and invade a country, you are not building it. I don't know your definition of building is but it runs contray to the traditional definition.