One of the things that is getting to me with the Can't Chew Gum and Walk crowd is that they cannot see how it all interacts. For example, I might very well not have supported going in as we did if we were not already shouldering the burden of maintaining sanctions, particularly protecting the Kurds and Shi'ia, through the "no fly" zones.
The brutality of the regime was a significant factor for me, so that overthrowing Saddam was morally sound, apart from any other consideration. The diversion of funds in the oil for food program, and the probability of infant deaths associated with it, has weighed on me for quite awhile, if you recall, in relation to the sanctions, so I was eager to resolve the matter and improve the situation of the populace.
The significant bankrolling of suicide bombers in the Territories made Saddam one of the key impediments to peace between Israel and Palestine, and showed how genocidal his intentions towards Israel were. The Hamas connection was well documented, but it seemed reasonable that he had a hand in other pots.
In these and other ways, the weight of the case is an accretion of circumstances particular to the situation with Iraq. Each case is different, and few would present themselves as favorably for military intervention as did Iraq. |
