If the United States is, or soon will be, at war with Iraq, Americans should understand that a compelling strategic rationale is absent.
Karen... you know this is not right...
There are a number of compelling strategic reasons for the overthrow of Saddam's regime.. Permit me to refresh your memory on the reasons that I, and others, have already discussed. (others can feel free to add to these as they deem pertinent).
1.) Demographics of the Middle East and muslim world.
50% of Saudi Arabia's population is under the age of 18, and thus directly under the influence of their militant Wahhabi religious leaders who see in them, a large pool of disgruntled, economically hopeless, recruits who are not happy with the Royal family and their running of the economy. This is what Bin Laden had been attempting to tap into, but what the US presence in the region, and support to the royals had been preventing. And over the entire Muslim world, 40% (some 400 million) are under the age of 18.. Even 1% of such a disgruntled population provides a ready recruiting ground for terrorist organizations.
2.) Iraq is largely a secular society, run by a despotic and totalitarian ruling clan (Saddam's family in Tikrit). Thus, this society could form the basis, if properly nurtured and supported, for a semi-democratic Arab state that could directly oppose the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia (preservation of balance of power in region). But that dictates a regime change and economic development.
3.) Iraq also forms a geographic "wedge" in the middle east. It holds a particular strategic position because of the direct influence such a regime change could cause in Iran and possibly Syria. Syria will be isolated by a regime change in Iraq. Iran's younger generation will be emboldened to take on their Theocratic government as the threat from Iraq dissipates and the Iran-Iraq "cold war" ends.
4.) These steps provide the possibility of weakening the economic power (oil) the Saudi regime holds over western economies. We'll now have "locked up" a ready second supplier of oil to the west which will diminish SA's ability to hold us "hostage" to economic blackmail via oil.
5.) Arafat, seeing that his primary supporters are quickly being neutralized/eliminated by the US actions, will either be forced to resign by Palestinian moderates, or will have to drastically alter his strategy for obtaining a Palestinian state.
6.) The ultiimate goal will be either a regime change in Saudi Arabia, possibly reinstituting the Hashemite "Caliphate" over the Muslim holy sites, or at least a containment of Saudi power via threat of such an action. This will result in essentially cutting the "head" off the militant Islamo-fascist "snake" and hopefully restore/create the foundation for real economic and social change in Arabia.
7. In order for the US and international community to effectively implement what I feel is a necessary "Marshall plan" for the middle east, there must be stability and liberalization in the societies at large, even if imposed from outside. Money currently being provided for economic assistance is merely being diverted to corrupt rulers who extort the West for even more money.
8. And finally, and most importantly, should Saddam obtain nuclear weapons, it is plainly obvious that he will use such a capability to dominate and control neighboring Arab states in the region. The US and UN will be essentially powerless, except through even more greivous economic sanctions, to stop him. Saddam has always perceived himself as a modern day "Saladin", destined to unify and lead the Arabs in the region. The Baathist party has such a unification as its "raison d'etre". Thus, the US/UN must strike now (preferably politically backed by the credible threat of military force) to overthrow Saddam and redirect Iraq's economic capability to internal development and not external conquest.
So there are 8 VERY STRONG strategic reasons for carrying the battle to Iraq and overthrowing Saddam. If you disagree with any of them, I would appreciate your being specific about the actual logical faults you might find in them rather than just responding with a touchy-feely "The US just shouldn't act this way"..
There will be many more Arab and Western deaths if we don't "drain the swamp" or at least reduce the waters a bit.. All of the worries about it "going badly" are the same worries that occurred in 1991, when people were predicting 25,000 US casualities (compared to the 200+ that actually occurred).
The US power in the world is being challenged by those who would seek to replace the western system with their own Theocratic and totalitarian one.. And those folks sitting in neutrality in the muslim world will side with whoever they perceive is winning (because that's the side their bread will be buttered on)..
Hawk |
