greg334
Veteran Expediter
1. Most importantly, we did not have the backing of the U.N. to go into Iraq. Do not get me wrong, I'm not saying that we needed it, but it is a major difference between the two.
Actually we did, and furthermore it was the policy of the country to follow the UN mandate to change the government when it is possible.
What happened was the objection of the French and Germans over the issue. They didn't want us there to discover their involvement with Saddam and the Oil for Food scandal or did we all forget about this.
2. France, Italy, Europe and the U.N. sanctioned our involvement in Lybia.
So?
I don't see their reasoning as legitimate but the only reason I can see is revenge and stabilizing their oil sources.
I think we should have said "well because France and Germany wasn't involved with Iraq, we are going to sit this one out. Oh and by the way, we are out of NATO"
3. We didn't put any boots on the ground in Lybia. 9 years occupying Iraq.
Great, but we spent money on it for no real reason. It wasn't the Germans, the Brits or France for that matter who provided the intel or the ammunition for the operation. When France could not re-arm their planes because they ran out of air to surface missiles, we stepped up and handed them a bunch.
4. Lybia = 1 billion dollars, Iraq = over 4400 American lives and 1 trillion dollars.
Well I would like to see Libya = 0 dollars. Can't do anything about Iraq other then to oppose the next time this happens.