Rubio And Crist Say The Iraq War Made America And The World ‘Safer And Better Off’

[cal04]

Rubio And Crist Say The Iraq War Made America And The World ‘Safer And Better Off’

This morning, CNN hosted a debate with Republican, Democratic, and Independent candidates for Florida’s Senate seat, Marco Rubio, Rep. Gregory Meek, and Gov. Charlie Crist. The three candidates debated a variety of current issues, and highlights included Crist and Rubio stating that they felt that all of the Bush tax cuts should be extended, even those for the wealthiest Americans.

At one point, a CNN moderator asked the candidates if “America is safer and better off for having gone to war in Iraq?” Rubio responded, “I think ultimately yes. First of all, the world is better off because Saddam Hussein is no longer in charge….The world is a safer place not to mention the Iraqi people are better off than they were under Saddam Hussein.”

Meek went next, saying that the “war was based on falsehoods and not on fact” and refused to give a “blanket yes” to the question of whether the world was safer thanks to the war. The congressman continued, “I think we would’ve been better off if we had looked at diplomatic solutions and hadn’t been lied to by the Bush administration.”

Crist then gave the last answer. “I think the world is a safer place because of the action we took in Iraq,” he concluded:

MODERATOR: Mr. Rubio, is America safer and better off for having gone to war in Iraq?

RUBIO: I think ultimately, yes. First of all, the world is better off because Saddam Hussein is no longer in charge. He is no longer in charge of that country. Let’s understand one thing. Right now we’re worrying about Iran possessing a nuclear weapon. If Saddam Hussein was still there you’d have a full-blown arms war the way you’ve seen between Pakistan and India. So the world is a safer place not to mention the Iraqi people are better off than they were under Saddam Hussein.

MODERATOR: Mr. Meek, same question.

MEEK: Well I would tell you this. There was a no-fly zone prior to going to war in Iraq. It was a war based on falsehood and not on fact. And also there are a number of American lives that have been lost. Saying that, those sacrifices that have been made, it’s important to note that the international community needs to continued to be engaged in Iraq. The largest U.S. embassy in the world is in Iraq because of the Bush doctrine. I understand the situation as to the world being safer because we went into Iraq, I couldn’t give you an overall blanket yes on that.

MODERATOR: Do you think we would’ve been better off if we hadn’t gone in?

MEEK: I think we would’ve been better off if we would’ve looked at diplomatic solutions and wouldn’t have been lied to by the Bush administration. I think a number of American lives would’ve been saved and this would be a different world if we would’ve given diplomacy an opportunity.

CRIST: I think the world is a safer place because of the action we took in Iraq.

Watch it: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/24/rubio-crist-iraq-safer/


It is an oddity of American political life that, more than seven years after the Bush administration launched its illegal and disastrous war in Iraq that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people unnecessarily, that major political players are still debating whether or not the war made our country and the world “safer and better off.” Nevertheless, it is important to dismantle the claims put forward by Rubio and Crist.

Rubio displays a hefty ignorance history by claiming that an Iraq under Saddam Hussein would’ve engaged in an arms war like that between India and Pakistan. Ever since the Gulf War, Iraq was under draconian sanctions that reduced its military to levels where it was completely unable to threaten any of its neighbors — and, unfortunately, exacted an enormous human cost on its civilian population. There could have been no arms race because Iraq did not have access to the materials to make them.

Rubio and Crist both claim that the world is a safer place thanks to the war in Iraq. The facts tell very a different story. In 2007, terrorism experts and research fellows at Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank conducted a survey of terrorism incidents worldwide since the Bush administration-led U.S. war in Iraq. Their study found that terrorism incidents worldwide increased by seven times, or six hundred percent, since the Bush administration invaded Iraq.

more at link

[EFerrari]

1. Rubio and Crist are the best evidence that this country still isn't safe

from Bushco. :grr:

[krabigirl]

2. Scary.

[gratuitous]

3. Thank goodness for no follow up

Niggling little details like has the invasion and occupation improved our standing in the world, stabilized the regions involved, whether it was worth the cost in terms of money, men and materiel, and whether anything else might have accomplished the same goal faster or cheaper. Saddam Hussein is gone, but was it legal? Did it follow a regular, legal procedure? If not, do we have any credibility to protest when a nation's leader we do like (at least this week) is taken out through extralegal means?

Is this what America means to you, Florida? Rubio and Crist are the frontrunners in this race. Is this what we stand for now?

[BeFree]

4. Gregory Meek?

Surely that was a typo? Did you copy and paste?

************

[Angry Dragon]

5. This long after we entered into a war

and you have to ask if we and the world are safer, is the answer.

The answer would have to be NO!!

The answer should be self evident and not need to be asked.

Were we safer after WWII ended?? No one asked that question.
Were we safer after Vietnam?? People asked.

[Dappleganger]

6. Yet there are "democrats" who are pushing us to vote for Crist...

just to keep Rubio out of office.

:eyes:

[BarbaRosa]

7. "First of all, the world is better off because Saddam Hussein

is no longer in charge." I wasn't aware that Saddam Hussein was in charge of the world.:crazy: