You appear to be one of these polarized people, judging from the end of your post, and if you are, I'll soon put you on ignore.
Many people close their minds to alternative views. Judging from your post, that may be the case; if so, I'll soon put YOU on ignore.
The US had NO justification to attack Iraq using UN resolutions when going in without the UN.
Fair enough; a strong argument can be made that the US needed no further UN action prior to an attack. The ceasefire was conditional upon Iraq's specific performance of certain tasks, and they failed to perform those tasks. The counter argument is that the resolution did not provide specifically for military action to restart; however, it didn't prohibit it, either. But the argument isn't essential. Forget the UN.
We had every right to remove Saddam without UN action. Why? Because George Bush correctly ascertained that removal of Saddam is obviously the best way to insure that another 9/11 doesn't occur. We're a soveriegn, and we have every right to do whatever is necessary to protect our country.
Now, before you start with the mantra (i.e., Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11), you may want to try opening up your mind a bit and consider the following:
ONE CANNOT INFER FROM SADDAM'S NONINVOLVEMENT IN 9/11 THAT HIS REMOVAL ISN'T THE BEST WAY TO PREVENT ANOTHER 9/11.
This fact is worth thinking about. If, in fact, we determine that (a) Saddam was not involved (as the administration has said), and (b) his removal is the best way to prevent another 9/11, the question is then, "Do we have the right to remove him?".
I say we do. We have the right to do anything we deem appropriate to protect our people. Violate international law. Thumb our noses at the French and the UN. Anything. The fact that we rid the world of a brutal dictator in the process is gravy.
The bottom line is that by installing a democracy in the center of the Mideast we will begin the long, slow process of ridding the world of Mideastern anti-Americanism. The administration correctly determined that this is the best way to insure our safety for years to come.
I was going to argue against the remainder of your post, but as I read the remaining paragraphs of your post, I get the idea you are just another anti-Bush liberal who doesn't understand the issues. So, if you want to ignore me, fine. If you want to learn, let me know -- I'll be glad to fill you in ... |
