[crobnson]

Whenever I bring up my reasons for supporting this war (to help the Iraqi people), I receive a backlash about why haven't we helped the people in other countries that are having the same problems. One place that is brought up is Haiti. I guess I have not educated myself with the whole worlds problems and so I do not have a reply. Are there people in other countries in this world that are as helpless as the Iraqis? I look forward to an education on this. Thank you.

[JeeperFreeper]

So there's two problems. The liberal argument is don't do anything about one problem because you have not done anything about the other problem. Your car has two flats. Don't fix the first flat because you haven't fixed the first. Two houses are on on fire, but there's only one fire engine. Don't put out the first fire because you are not putting out the second.

[ovrtaxt]

We are doing this to eliminate the threat to American interests. Helping Iraqis is secondary. Remember 9-11.

[redbaiter]

"Perfection or Nothing!" is the cry of the fanatic. So what if we haven't solved all the world's problems? We solve problems that affect us. Our government's duty is to protect us from external threats, not the make the world a joyful playground of smiling children, pretty flowers and playful puppies.

[Restorer]

A great many of the people in third world countries live under dictatorial regimes. Few of these, however, are as spectacularly brutal as the Ba'ath regime of Iraq.

Their argument is not logical. When analyzed, it is that if we cannot simulatneously solve all the world's problems, it is wrong to try to solve any one of them.

[irishfox]

The war is waged primarily to get rid of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction so that he won't hit us with them. Also to remove him from power 'cause he is a psycho, and he sponsor's terrorisim against US interests and American citizens.

We would love to see the Iraqi people liberated, however this was not our first concern. (It is of grave concern though) President Bush wants to protect Americans first and foremost.

We help people all over the world. We send money and supplies to feed millions. I don't feel that we have to apologize for anything to those acusers. We do more than any other country in the world to feed, clothe, house and protect the less fortunate. If we can't do it all, then the acusers should do more to help...at least we are trying more than anyone else and we deserve props for that. I am through with these arm chair quarterbacks who always complain and never pitch in.

[LibertyThug]

I noticed the date you signed up and perhaps you are here for other reasons.

However, I will tell you the reasons we are at war: we are there the help the Iraqi people, we are there to get rid of an evil man who has WMD, we are there to get rid of an evil man who funds terrorists. That is not the problem in Haiti. If that were the problem in Haiti, we would go there and also free those people.

Do you get it now?

[chance33_98]

Gore repeats that Saddam MUST GO - June 2000

Taliban, Clinton, Saudi Involvement - All laid out in a book published in 2000 (from USMC.MIL site)

The Democrats' Case Against Saddam Hussein (Dems nailed, yet again)

Headline Rundown and links on Iraq - Things the democrats have conviently forgot...

Saddam Abused His Last Chance, Clinton -clear and present danger to safety of people everywhere 1998

What the democrats want you to forget

Iraq is a Regional Threat, capable of as much as 200 tons of VX nerve agent (1999 Clinton report)

Czech military reports say iraq has smallpox virus in weapons stockpile (and camelpox)

2/7/1998 : Arab media: Clinton will strike due to sex scandal (&links to tons of arab news on clinton)

Iraqi chemical weapons buildup reported (Sept 2001 Report)

Clinton, Gore rally domestic support for strike at Iraq, "unholy axis" (1998 Must read)

statement President Clinton from 1998 on the air strikes

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Full Text, Sense of Congress - Remove Saddam

[RS]

Most of the world has the same problem as Iraq - once you kick out the bad guys.
They have no sustaining economy built up.
After the war, or famine, or flood etc. The NGO's ( Red Cross, U.N., Food for the World etc ) come in and hand out stuff, but noone builds an economy. ( well, very few )
Iraq will be luckier then most, as they have the oil reserves, but it is a mixed blessing.
Only a limited amount of people need pump the oil, so many are put to work on government projects.
Being "hired" by the government for public works does not create a sustainable economy.


The ticking bomb is that at some point the oil will run dry - and there will be no other source of money to support the population.

Getting back to Haiti - I would ask them just what do you want us to do besides keep them on US welfare ?
US companies would love to pour money in making it a major resort, but because we have given them back self-rule, they have put blocks on outside investment.

[Ecliptic]

These people aren't really interested in Haiti or North Korea, or Cuba....this is just an argument....if we had gone to Haiti, they would have said what about Iraq? If we had gone To North Korea, they would have said what about Iraq?

Ignore their arguments and try to find out why they are really against going to Iraq (they don't like Bush, the Demorats were against it, they are just afraid; for example). If you can find out the real reason for their opposition, then you can address it....

[RS]

As a follow-up
Lets take Cuba - they are still complaining that our trade embargo is killing their children. ... Bull
They have free trade with every other country on the planet and if they don't get to trade with us their children die ?

Besides the fact that this is an amazing admission of the failure of Communisum and the superiority of Capitalism, what to they expect to gain by punishing their own country ?

[najida]

Too often, folks want to see a 100% good or 100% evil in a situation...like motivations for this war. The others have listed excellent reasons above. The way I see it, like everything in life, you have to weigh all aspects and find the path with the best overall outcome. Help Iraq,yeah. WMD (took me the longest to figure this out, thought it was "Wild Mad Dog" in referrence to Saddam), fer sure. al Queda ties, like 'duh' do you think? Oil, probably...it's there, we use the most....and what is so bad about that? There are things I find very amusing..... Like "No Blood For Oil" posters being carried by someone who arrived in an SUV, with a plastic rain slicker & water bottles, carrying a styrofoam cup of cappacino...HELLLOOO!!! Like, er, a...well, we DO use the stuff an awful lot, now don't we? It is the height of hypocracy to act like "oil" is this evil substance when all of us (me especially) aren't ready to give it up and live in the dark, take cold showers and ride their bike 50 miles to work just yet. The other is referring to all the other countries we a) Didn't help since the Revolutionary War b) All the countries we didn't intervene with first.... Well, excuse me for not being born sooner! Ya gotta start somewhere....Iraq is a nice springboard for the rest of 'em. But there is the flip side....if you DO stuff for other folks and intervene too often, then you are considered an arrogant colonialist.... Somedays a country just can't win. Now granted, if someone would just make me Queen of the Universe, we wouldn't have this problem.

[politique]

The conservative argument, as discussed in my posted essay Clash of Practicalities, should not be that the U.S. should intervene on behalf of other countries, it should intervene on its own behalf. This war is not about freeing Iraqis --that's a nice concquence. This war is about protecting this nation from a living threat.

[Burkeman1]

The gamble we are making is this: We hope to create a successful, prosperous, and free Democratic Iraq with our invasion. We hope that this nation will act as a beacon to the rest of the region and will destabalize their regimes and at the same time negate home grown Islamic fundamentalism that has been seen as the only alternative in the region by it's radicals. If we fail: we have isolated ourselves from even traditional Europeon allies, demonstrated that we are agrressive to the world, and have increased hatred of this nation 100 fold in an already insane part of the world.

Since even our best "ally" in the region- that recieves direct economic and military aid from us- is Turkey and it is a corrupt banana republic once step away from a military junta at all times - the above mentioned plan is totally insane.

Forget the self serving idiotic reasons on the Left on why they hate this war. They are liars and hypocrites. But that doesn't mean this war isn't magically stupid (to borrow a phrase from a friend). We have taken a gamble in this war that was not only ill advised but even a drunken compulsive gambler would not have taken. That is why we should never have gone into this war. Because if we fail- the fallout is far worse than if we had done nothing.