Posted on 02/20/2003 2:27:50 PM PST by AnalogReigns
I disagree with Ted on the Iraq war, but I'd like to hear other FReepers refutation of his points, before I chime in.
Lets see how sharp we are....
We shouldn't attack IRAQ for the reasons stated, period.
Now we should make the moral argument for attack.
It is as follows:
1) Saddam made a deal to end the Gulf war and then he broke it. Thus, by any logical standard the war should resume..
2) The second he launched SCUD's at the Jews (who were non-combatants) and torched the Kuait oil fields during his (quick) retreat, he became a war criminal. At that point, imo.. all bets (with regard to the "power given us" under the UN resolution to remove him) were off.
I don't want to be the New Roman Empire and I don't want to base foreign policy on sketchy, arbitrary notions of "preemption"
But this guy has it coming regardless, for the reasons stated above.
It's a just war and we should see it through, but not necessarily for the reasons we have been given.
Nor is it likely that Iraq would risk its destruction by attempting to assasinate the President of the United St...oooppsss. They DID do that. Likely is not good enough any more after 9/11. Plus we know for a fact Saddam funds terrorism in Israel. Other arab nations also fund terrorists also, but Saddam is the spookiest and has been the most unpredictable.
Oh I doubt he (Saddam) would even bother sending his weapons to al-Qaida; I think he would launch them himself at the invading US troops or at Israel. As the author said: he would then have nothing to lose.
I read today that Saddam has been sending and hiding his WMDs in friendly neighboring states (Syria). Are we then going to invade Syria?
The issue is not whether Iraq has cooperated sufficiently with U.N. inspectors or complied with U.N. resolutions.
Yes, it is.
The issue is not even whether Iraq possesses chemical or biological weapons. The only pertinent issue is whether Iraq poses a serious, imminent threat to the United States, thereby justifying pre-emptive war.
Yes, it is the issue. They are NOT supposed to have those weapons. Iraq was supposed to DISARM.
The pro-war camp has utterly failed to make the case that Iraq poses such a threat.
I guess this guy does not pay attention to the news. Saddam doesn't pose a threat??? What a moron.
Must ask the author's question then: how many holy crusades are we in for?
We heard this prior to invading Afghanistan to remove the most Islamist and extreme of any arab regime on the planet, the Taliban. Where is the condemnation and arab rage on the streets? Hhhmmm... No self respecting Arab is going to miss the very secular Saddam Hussein or his cronies. Saddam's own people want him gone and they WILL be dancing in the streets just like the happy young girls in Afghanistan who now can attend schools without fear of execution.
Yes, it is.
Careful here. If we are going to condemn Iraq for violating UN resolutions, we must also condemn Israel. Of course, a true Conservative would have long ago thumbed his nose at the UN and their globalist, unenforcable "sanctions", thereby eliminating that as an excuse.
This may be true, but I doubt they will embrace a US invading force with open arms either. They have a flaky and fickle history, the Arabs. When the English and Americans landed in North Africa in 1942, and freed it from the French, Arabs cheered the invaders because they thought it was the Nazis. Probably says more about the French than anything else, but it shows how fickle the Arabs can be.
What's "pre-emptive" about it? We've been bombing Iraq since 1998, relating to WMD.
The war/no war dichotomy is misleading. Let me give you three possibilities.
1. Pull out of the region. Saddam gets all he wants, our Kurdish allies get genocided by the returning Iraqi army, etc.
2. Continue the "War of Containment" for lack of another word. Enforce flightzones, maintain forces in the region, continue bombings, ad infinitum. Iraqi people suffer on and on. We keep paying, our "allies" make craven deals and stab us in the back.
3. Finish the war. This was always talked about, but there was no political will, or enough focus, until 9/11.
.
I see often in these articles references to and pleas about "history" and the like. Yet they don't examine the actual history. I suspect he knows it, but omits it because it would not make his essay palatable, and would highlight that he does not discuss the consequences of applying his own postion.
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.
I will offer one more point concerning the physical presence of a post-Saddam regime with a significant American military force in the heart of the Middle East bordering Iran and Saudi Arabia.
At best, this is an effective presence to influence other countries and protect pro-American regimes (following the model in Europe and Asia). At worst, this presents the Islamic authoritarian/militant/terrorists with fighting on two fronts (Isreal and Afghanistan/Iraq) and moving the threat to them closer to home with a greater ability to interdict operations against the homefront.
As a member of the armed forces, I would rather be an armed target in the Middle East for our enemies, than allowing those I am sworn to defend remain targets unopposed in the US.
This is an excellent strategic point. I just wonder what Israel is providing to the US for taking some of the heat off of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.