I certainly doubt anyone in Israel misses Saddam - for the part of my family that lives there, one of their scariest memories had always been the Scud strikes during the Gulf War, partly because one hit close to home, partly because at the time they were widely rumoured to be loaded with chemical or biological weapons.
That said, I think as awful as they were, the Baathist (and other secular conservative) regimes were perhaps not the greatest target for the West in the Middle East, and I think the support for their destruction was short-sighted and certainly hasn't done Israel a lot of favours. It's let a lot of devils out of the box, and Iran has reaped the most benefits.
And, as I keep saying, I don't believe there is a military solution to the Iran problem. That's a stupid idea. Nor do I believe Iran is so stupid as to be looking for a military solution to Israel. Iran's biggest priority is expanding their sphere of influence, and having as much access to the world market as they can while they're at it. Does that mean they need to be appeased? Of course not. But I think the question here is far from as simple as "to Israel or not to Israel". And I think the far more pressing question for the West in particular is what to do about the power vacuum left in the wake of the Arab Spring, which is gradually getting filled up by all the wrong people. Aiming to create another power vacuum in Iran would neither be practical nor solve it (and arguably would make things a lot worse).
As for the assessment of the results of the Iraq war for the Americans, I'd suggest considering that the only winners of that conflict were Iran, and to a lesser extent Russia and China. Great cause for tens of thousands of lost American lives, no doubt.
__________________
There are only forty people in the world and five of them are hamburgers.
-Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart)
|