Poll Two - Bush: Iraq

[Jaboney]

Did you initially support the war on Iraq? / Do you support a continued armed presence?

• At the time, I thought attacking Iraq was a good idea/ I think maintaining a significant presence is a good idea.
• At the time, I thought attacking Iraq was a good idea/ I think maintaining a significant presence is a bad idea.
• At the time, I thought attacking Iraq was a bad idea/ I think maintaining a significant presence is a good idea.
• At the time, I thought attacking Iraq was a bad idea/ I think maintaining a significant presence is a bad idea.
• None of the above. (Please explain below.)

This question specifically concerns the invasion and continued military presence in Iraq.

There has been much debate, I’m curious as to the exact numbers.
If there’s significant interest, these polls may be repeated in a few months.

Feel free to briefly justify your vote, or to simply vote and remain silent.
Please keep comments on other’s posts to a minimum… there’s lots of places for the running arguments.

Thanks for the feedback and suggestions. Suggested refinements welcomed.

[MaPoSquid]

As the first “other” vote, I thought invading Iraq was the only way to destroy its dictatorship. It wasn’t necessarily a good or bad idea, it was the only means to accomplish that end. Similarly, maintaining troops there is the only way to guide the process of building a new government; pulling out would have led to a collapse and factional war, as opposed to the limited mess that is happening now.

Just look at what happened to Afghanistan when the Soviets finally gave up. Iraq may or may not end up with a stable government of a type that the U.S. likes, but neither merely assassinating Saddam Hussein nor leaving him in place would have resulted in any potential for a positive outcome.