AN EMAIL FROM THE FRONT

andrew sullivan ^ | Wednesday, April 14, 2004 | in iraq

[Alberta's Child]

It was stated they we would be there for years.

120,000 of them?

[neefer]

The fact is that they had no WMD with any kind of capacity to be used against us. Anthrax in the mail killed Americans.

Saddam was a murderous dictator. Not a nice guy. So what. Why is that our problem? Bin Laden doesn't fall into the nice guy category either, and until 9/11/01, your logic for not going after bad guys with ill intent would have made more sense.

[Dog Anchor]

Foreign Affairs
The Wall Street Journal
The Economist
Reason
Insight
The New Republic
Biography of Theodore Roosevelt
Science
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Victor Hugo
Nikos Kazantzakis
Henry James
William James
Henry Miller
Aristotle
Ayn Rand

[CSM]

"It seems pretty clear that they lied. And that this war is pointless and harmful to America."

Expat is a very apt name for you. Do you also consider the Chirac, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, H.Clinton and UN statements declaring the existance of WMD also lies? Everyone in the world had the same intelligence and everyone knew that WMD existed in Iraq. It is just a matter of time before they are found.

How has America been harmed? It seems to me that the concentration of terrorist attacks in the ME is a benefit to America. No attacks on US soil is somehow harmful to us? Check your priorities!

[Broadside Joe]

"No I don't think Iraq supported terrorism against the US anywhere near the run-up to war. Do you have a shred of evidence that it did"

Oh it had to be against us alone? Did you forget our Dept of State people that were killed in the west bank? Do you know who Hamas is? And it had to be "in the run up to the war"? Keep moving the goal post, go ahead I guess that's all you can do. Slick willy should have nuked them when Saddam tried to assassinate Bush 41.

How's that for "other reasons"?

[Coop]

The entire series of claims about WMD and Al-Qaeda. All lies. Everyone knows it.

An entire series of 'em? And everyone knows? Well, then it should be quite easy for you to prove. Please proceed.

[Blessed]

> Everyone now knows that and even the administration is tactitly admitting it. Intent to use them would be the only legitimate reason for a war and it is clear that Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of this administration lied our country into war.<

You don't consider genocide as a legitamit reason for war?
Why does the WMD have to be a threat to continental US to be a treat to the world and the US? (Kuwait and Israel were in reach of his missles)

The problem with our thinking over the past 15 years in this country is this idea that if we don't get a perfect outcome their must be a reason and somone must be held responsible.A baby is born with birth defects it's the Dr's fault.Terrorists act it is someones fault for not preventing it.I wonder if this is not brought on by the computer age."Garbage in garbage out" implies perfection is obtainable.

[MissAmericanPie]

Iraq should be divided up between all the zealots, with a nice big slice for the Kurds. Then we can leave them to kill each other and do the job for us. It probably took someone as brutal as Saddam to control those fools over there and force them to co-exist.

Our quick exit may de-stablize the entire middle east, leaving them busy killing each other. Iran will, no doubt, attempt to rush in, Syria will object. Not really a bad result, on the face of it.

[Broadside Joe]

"120,000 of them?"


Nope. As the the Iraqi forces were built up we would slowly stand down. This has all been explained before many times over in the press.

[conserv13]

The answer is clearly to split the country up into three new countries.

I agree, but what happens when those three 'new' countries start fighting each other? They will fight over oil $, water, Turkey will not get along with a 'Kurdistan', etc...

I can see why we supported Saddam in the 80s when we HAD to to balance Iran, and why the US does support dictatorships when it is in our interest.

[Alberta's Child]

Why does the WMD have to be a threat to continental US to be a treat to the world and the US? (Kuwait and Israel were in reach of his missles)

That's exactly the point. You've presented a perfectly valid argument for why Saddam Hussein was a problem . . . for Kuwait and Israel.

[neefer]

True, Ex, there were plenty of reasons to go after Bin Laden before 9/11.

Going after Hussein turned Khadaffy into a "good guy." WMD or not, the war in Iraq sends a message to trouble makers.

[Alberta's Child]

Understood. Did the Bush administration even think in their wildest dreams that 120,000 troops would be there even one year later?

[CSM]

"As far as I can tell the whole thing stinks and I will be casting my vote accordingly (no, not Kerry)."

With your attitude and slant towards the BBC, why don't you step up to the plate and denounce your US citizenship? Why even participate in our elections if you don't have the vision to still view these events from an American perspective instead of the BBC perspective?