Pro-war camp can't make the case that an attack is in nationa interest

The Orange County Register ^ | Feb. 2, 2003 | Ted Galen Carpenter

[Barandth]

Pro-war camp can't make the case that an attack is in national interest Feb. 2, 2003 Orange County Register Column By Ted Galen Carpenter Vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute.

President George W. Bush, his surrogates, and the White House's pro-war allies in Congress and the media routinely cite an array of reasons a U.S. military campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein is a good idea.

[Reagan Man]

LOL

My colorful rhetoric is nothing compared to the rude and crude behavior who've displayed on FR in the past. I don't know what you expect to accomplish by pinging the AM. Such an act is childish nonsense, at best and a waste of time.

I suggest you stuff it.

[Reagan Man]

>>>Not your mindless allowances for scum like Ali Bubba Bush,that's for sure.

Calling the President Bush scum, proves my point. You belong over at DU!

[the_doc]

I forgot to mention that the libertarians and Buchanans and liberals have thus far refused to notice that Saddam already has a loaded WMD gun pointed at America's head.

This particular gun just happens to have a long trigger pull. (The "trigger pull" is the time required for Saddam to perfect his development and delivery of WMDs to his target.)

This is a threat scenario which libertarian theory can't address. It's because libertarian theory is archaic in this ugly new world of the 21st century. And that's obvious.

***

Libertarians and Buchananites and liberals would "argue" that IF we hadn't fought the first Gulf War, THEN we wouldn't be in this mess. Well, I don't necessarily agree. But for the sake of the argument, I am prepared to pretend that the libertarians and Buchananites are correct about that.

Ah, but the libertarians and Buchananites and liberals are making a dubious claim which is not an argument against war at this time even if their dubious claim is correct. The appeasers can't understand the problem which we now face, much less address it correctly. Gosh, we have to address the mess which we are in NOW.

Buchanan has STUPIDLY maintained in a recent column that Saddam has been CONTAINED. He needs to pull his head out of...the sand.

[MrLeRoy]

You forgot [...] MrLeRoy. FR's resident "pot is the savior for the world" poster

That is a lie. Keep telling your lies, Dane---it demonstrates the baselessness of the Drug Warrior position.

[sneakypete]

What is it about liberals who have their brains wired to accept logical fallacies as valid arguments ? is it genetic ?

I dunno. What is it about people who don't even know what a liberal is? They obviously can't even see the obvious.

[sneakypete]

I don't know what you expect to accomplish by pinging the AM.

I pinged the monitor to try to get a answer to why the originator of this thread was banned. That part had nothing to do with you.

[sneakypete]

Calling the President Bush scum, proves my point.

If you had a point,you would put your eye out playing with it.

[VRWC_minion]

Your right I made the logical fallacy that all liberals are wrong, your wrong therefore your a liberal. Sorry, but it could happen to anyone.

[bigunreal]

Most people would define my views as isolationist, but they'd be mistaken. I believe in diplomatic relations and trade with other countries, as well as offering humanitarian aid when possible. I don't want to withdraw from the world, or build what globalist critics invariably refer to as a "wall around America." However, I don't think we should impose our values on other countries, even if their governments are run by nasty tinpot dictators. I don't think we should have allowed so many legal immigrants into this country over the past few decades, and I certainly think we should have stopped the flood of illegal aliens by securing our borders a long, long time ago. I believe that our government should be solving our domestic problems before they attempt to solve the problems of the world. Charity begins at home; if your family is starving, you don't leave them empty-handed and go out and feed the neighborhood. I think we've been doing just that for far too long. Anyway, I know I'm a "1%" Buchananite who has little chance of converting the majority of my fellow citizens.

[bigunreal]

We obviously see things differently. For the record, I am a populist with libertarian views on some issues (but strongly opposed to both unlimited free trade and unlimited open borders).

[okie01]

"Other than the Israeli's,he is the LEAST likely one in the middle east to supply Al Qaeda with any WMD because they would most likely turn around and use them on HIM."

Arab proverb: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Hussein and bin Laden (and whoever succeeded him) have every reason to have cooperated. And there is compelling independent evidence to this effect.

"Saddam Hussein is responsible for the deaths of more radical fundie Muslims that every other country combined."

Name one.

"and part of the reason we are attacking him is to protect Ali Bubba-2 Bush's Saudi business partners."

Set aside your anti-Bush bias for a moment. Think clearly.

[sneakypete]

"Saddam Hussein is responsible for the deaths of more radical fundie Muslims that every other country combined." Me.

Name one.</>

Name "one" what? Are you asking me to contradict my own statement and name a country that is responsible for more radical fundie Muslim deaths than Iraq?

[sneakypete]

your wrong therefore your a liberal

Actually I am right and I AM a "liberal". Your problem is you don't know what a liberal is. Then again,you most likely think Ali Bubba-2 is a conservative.

[okie01]

You claim al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein are at each other's throats. Name one radical Islamic who has met his death at Iraq's hands.

[Timesink]

There is no doubt that Saddam is a murderous tyrant. But that characteristic does not distinguish him from several dozen other rulers around the world. If overthrowing a dictator is sufficient reason for the United States to go to war, one must ask how many other holy crusades are in our future.

And the answer is: A lot. Bush said as much in his speech to Congress after 9/11. We probably won't be done during the Bush presidency. We probably won't be done fifteen years from now. The simple reality is that we have reached the point in history where horrid subhumans - who want to either kill us all or enslave us under their stifling theocracy - can potentially get access to technology that can do us great harm. We thus have no choice but to adopt a doctrine that says "If you desire to harm us, we WILL destroy you, and we will do it BEFORE you are able to accomplish your obvious goals."

[sneakypete]

Name one radical Islamic who has met his death at Iraq's hands.

Is a name enough,or do you want his phone number,too? Did you ever hear about the Iran/Iraq war? It was in all the papers. Iran was/is ran by radical fundie Muslims who are of a different Muslim sect than Saddam Hussein,and Iran had hundreds of thousands of casualities in that war. The Muslim sect Saddam Hussein follows is not (or wasn't,anyhow) anti-American,and in fact allowed Christians and Jews to live there peacefully. BTW,Saddam Hussein and Iraq were considered to be our allies back then,and we supplied him with aid.

[Kip Lange]

Anyway, I know I'm a "1%" Buchananite who has little chance of converting the majority of my fellow citizens.

Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. You just made me rethink my position for a second -- which means you most certainly have a chance of converting people to your cause. Good points, although I'm not in agreement with the premise that what we're doing is "imposing our values" on people (which is I think probably our main ideological split).

[okie01]

"Is a name enough,or do you want his phone number,too?"

You don't know of a single radical Islamist that Saddam Hussein has liquidated, do you?

Iranian cannon fodder and Shiite marsh Arabs don't qualify. The fact is: there is absolutely no basis to believe that Iraq and al-Qaeda are NOT natural allies!. Given Hitler's racist beliefs, you probably believed it impossible for Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan to be WW II allies, as well.

[VRWC_minion]

Your problem is you think their is some agreed upon defintion of terms for either liberal or conservative. In either case your theories about Hussien will yield a higher body count than Bush's.

[Samurai_Jack]

The harsh reality is that the Middle East has no history of democratic rule

Well there is a problem right there...

Isreal is a democratic nation and quite stable in spite of the genocidal arabs and the villainous United (League of) Nations.

Egypt and Turkey I believe are republican forms of government. The Iranian Student movements are gaining strength against the Fascism instituted by the Carter Administration.

I see no reason to abandon the Middle East to Totalitarianism when better options are available. Even if you have to use force to liberate an oppressed people.