We will disagree. International law works well enough, if we let it. It doesn't "work" when you want to have unilateral decisions rubber stamped, but in general it's probably a good thing that the US doesn't get everything it wants rubber stamped. In the case of Iraq, the rest of the world was correct in not wanting to interfere, and the Us was wrong. It was wrong to remove Saddam unilaterally, and it was a terrible waste of our money and men. It appears that on top of the wrong we have done in terms of precedent, we will not even get an outcome that is desirable. If we are lucky the Iraqis will just kill each other. If we are unlucky, we will see the region destabilized as other countries get pulled in to the Iraqi civil war- which could easily include Iran, Syria and Turkey.
When you have broken a vase, often there is no putting it back together in a way that will hold water. There is no putting Saddam back, and bringing back to life the civilians and non-civilians that have been killed. The damage has been done, and the things that caused the damage were put in to motion by the US.
I see no way to resolve our disagreement. I rest very easy knowing I opposed the war. Apparently you can rest easy knowing you support the violent deposition of leaders of other countries, without world approval, simply because your government thinks a change is in order. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. |
