Maalox doesn't raise from the dead those killed by this war, deaths which, now that everyone knows the WMD Bush was told weren't there aren't, are being justified by reference to mass graves we helped Saddam to fill.
Here are some questions raised about this war by Pat Buchanan, questions that apply whether the next president is Bush or Kerry:
Can the United States afford the cost in blood and treasure of a Bush policy of preventive war, when the occupation of one Arab country of 23 million has tied down half our armed forces and cost $200 billion?
Can we maintain our imperial presence in 120 countries with an Army of half a million men? Should we double the size of our Army to maintain our commitments, or cut back on our commitments to defend other nations' frontiers and fight other nations' wars?
Is the vast presence of US forces in the Islamic world a deterrent to terrorism, or an incitation to terror? Where hatred of America is pandemic, is disengagement a wiser policy than intervention? Has the war and occupation of Iraq reduced terror or given jihadists a rallying cause? The Spanish might have some thoughts on this.
With Iran and North Korea closer to a nuclear capacity than Saddam ever was, was it wise to tear up alliances and tie down our military ousting a dictator who, no matter how odious, was no threat?
Given our budget deficits, the overextension of our military, our isolation from allies and the opposition of Congress, is the Bush policy of preventive war already a dead letter?
Finally, why do scores of millions of Arab and Islamic peoples hate us and wish to see us humiliated in Iraq? At one time, we were the most admired nation on earth. Is any of this our fault, unpatriotic as that question may seem?
Message 19942635 |
