Bush keeps telling people the importance of Iraq

[Deja Q]

Maybe I'm missing out on something; but was it because Saddam was about to attack us, because we were going to nation-build, or something else?

It seems the WMDs weren't there

Bush campaigned in 2000 he wouldn't nation-build (so now we're helping not just Iraq but helping build other nations like India, Mexico, China, Vietnam... -- meanwhile the US isn't being improved at all; it seems to be going the other way. So maybe he did keep his word, in that he's not building the US?

I don't recall any other reasons he or anybody else cited; what have I missed?

BTW: Saddam was a vile little degenerate and as with Ken Lay I'm glad he's dead. I'm also sorry they were vile little vermin when they could have used their leadership status for far more good, but at least neither of them can do anyone any more harm. (which reminds me, has Ken's survivors done the right thing and return the money?)

[radfringe]

1. Bush: Nothing. Except for it's part of

Bush: Imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of the world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens. You know, I've heard this theory about everything was just fine until we arrived, and kind of we're going to stir up the hornet's nest theory. It just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.

REPORTER: What did Iraq have to do with that?

Bush: What did Iraq have to do with what?

REPORTER: The attack on the World Trade Center?

Bush: Nothing. Except for it's part of -- and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack.

-- George W. Bush, White House, Aug. 21, 2006

[WinkyDink]

2. Am I reading your post correctly, that Saddam is dead? Because he's not.