Quote - Giuliani's oversimplistic world

First we have the obvious,

Rudy Giuliani said yesterday he "never had any doubt" that if he were President four years ago, he would have invaded Iraq. He said he is now "even more certain" that it was the correct national security move

Second, I want to point to another one of those moments where Rudy Giuliani's oversimplification likely speaks to a larger misunderstanding of the war he deems himself fit to govern.

"We'd have two -- instead of one -- irresponsible, terrorist-supporting regimes that have enormous amounts of wealth available to them wanting to become nuclear powers in Middle East," he said. Libya would also be "a terrorist-supporting state with nuclear ambitions," he said.

Without the US overextension into Iraq, it is extremely unlikely that Iran would be the same problem that it is today. The US would likely have far broader world support, the Iranians wouldn't be emboldened by gaining in Iraq, and without the anti-US sentiment, Israel/Lebanon, Israel/Palestine, and efforts in the broader Muslim world wouldn't be quite as messy.

Giuliani is receiving foreign policy advice primarily from several of neocons who were in, around, and influencing the Bush administration when it was making so many of the historically catastrophic decisions. I have to wonder if they're playing Giuliani the same way they played Bush, playing on his 9-11 experience ("Oh, you're such a great and bold leader") and lack of understanding to "ego" him into these positions.

Just thinking out loud.