The Arguments: II – It will create more terrorism
I can understand why the left thinks this is an effective argument. Anybody who says that they are not at least a little afraid of another attack is lying or a fool. The left is hoping to take advantage of peoples' fears. However, this argument does not stand up to the least amount of intellectual scrutiny.
First, if we were to leave Iraq alone, would Al Qaeda stop trying to attack us? Certainly not. 9/11, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings and other incidents are evidence of that. Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11, not because we invaded Iraq and freed Kuwait, but because we tarnished the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia with our presence. (Really, this is UBL’s #1 beef.) To prevent attacks, based on such a premise, we would need to become complete isolationists. And remember, had we not tarnished the honor of Saudi Arabian dirt, Kuwait and probably Saudi Arabia would be under Saddam’s control today. And whether or not you belived that the Gulf War was all about oil or not, an honest person must admit that both countries, plus others like Qatar are much better off today than they would have been otherwise.
Will the Muslim world be incited to attack us? This assumes widespread support for Saddam. Huh? Nobody in the region, with the exception of some terrorists, likes him. This is evidenced by most of his neighbors supporting the US position. The nations, who do not, are largely silent. This is because secretly they want Saddam gone. Even the original terrorist himself (Arafat) has rebuffed Saddam. The terrorists, (some of whom he is currently harboring) will try to attack us regardless of what we do in the coming months.
Will some fence sitters be incited to attack us? To whatever extent this is true, then it must equally be true that some fence sitters will be deterred for fear of reprisal.
But at a more macro level, should we form policy, based on fear of reprisal?
If the “it will create more terrorism” argument is valid, then we should stop pursuing Al Qaeda suspects like kahlid mohammed. After all, this has got to really piss off the terrorists community. (Quite frankly, I expect a response, maybe even hostage taking and demands for exchange.) Of course, the left would say we should pursue the terrorists. But if the reaction from the terrorists is the same for us removing Saddam, and for arresting Al Qaeda, then what is the intellectual or logical basis for the argument? There is none.
In the end, Iraq and its’ people will be far better off than they are today. A free and prosperous Iraq will be the lasting legacy that the Muslim world will be faced with, and the terrorists will become more and more isolated. |
