Nicholas, I take it that you think the war was a big mistake?
I would like to hear your reasoning on that, in the mean time here's my reasoning on why I think the President did the right thing:
Let's consider the much debated subject of WMDs and our decision to invade Iraq and remove Saddam. Let me start this with a brief review of the American environment as a prelude without going into a bunch of minute.
Let me start out by saying that America has never been the land of appeasement. This hasn't been a weakness of ours but a strength. The American people have never been into turning the other cheek when it comes to the deaths of our citizens at home or abroad. We respond in kind depending on the scale of the offense. If our citizens or interests are attacked, either at home or internationally, we respond in kind in order to protect both. IMO the American people wouldn't stand for anything less. So, with this in mind, America was looking for some type of recourse after 9/11. 9/11, being the most egregious attack on American soil since the War of 1812.
Now say you're the President and you realize all of the above. What's a President to do? Being that the attack was carried out by a terrorist organization that is made up of many different type nationalities it kind of makes in hard to react in any specific manner. You can't identify even one country as a base for a reprisal since Al-Qiada is a mobile organization. Since there are multiple countries that Al-Qiada operates out of it's pretty hard for a President to pick one at random to attack. Say the President decides on attacking one of the main instigators of terrorism in the mideast, Syria. What kind of response is this going to induce from the surrounding countries? Indeed, most of those countries the US is barely on speaking terms. Not to mention what kind of affect this is going to have on the more moderate countries like Jordan? Now the President knows there's one country in the Mideast that's headed by a man of unspeakable cruelty and ruthlessness topped off with a generous disregard for the people he rules. He knows that this dictator would love to get his hands on a nuclear device to use against his enemies. He’s even had some questionable reports that this dictator may be trying to buy material to make a bomb. The majority of the world has already expressed an extreme dislike for this reckless leader..........
Say that now the President knows that this terrorist organization is an off shoot of Muslim Fundamentalism. Can he attack Muslim Fundamentalist without being condemned? Are they even just located in one country? No. He still needs to formulate a response while the world is still sympathetic towards the US because of 9/11.
He looks at the whole problem long term. He sees Kingdoms like Saudi Arabia where the lead players of Al-Qaida originated. He looks at the sheikdoms in the area where many terrorist foot soldiers are coming from and he decides one of the main reasons why fundamentalism is so strong has to do with the lack of any kind of democracy in the area and that small clans have the vast majority of wealth, majority of the country lives just above the poverty line. Syria has been called social democratic but it's hardly that. So the President decides that there are 2 things that would suppress the further expansion of fundamentalism. Setting up a true democratic style government where the gov't leaders are truly elected by the majority and the redistribution of wealth that would most likely come about if a successful democratic style Gov't where implemented. Not only for humanitarian purposes but since Iraq had already been weakened by a previous war and Saddam was still threatening the region he decides invading Iraq and removing Saddam from power to be the best response. He knows the solution is difficult and is not going to be easy sailing. I mean, these people have been more or less slaves of either a sheik a king or some other tyrant since time began. So empowering these people with democracy is not going to be an easy thing and will take time.
Now that he has a target and a viable reason (Saddam and WMDs) to invade Iraq he tries to build a coalition as his father did before him. Unfortunately, the previous coalition members, some having set up business arrangements with Saddam shortly after Desert Storm, don't care to join the coalition again and vocally oppose invading Iraq. Many oppose invading simply because they don't wish to draw the ire of terrorism on their own country. So the President decides to forge ahead with the few allies that America has that will help.
Iraq is in a key strategic position geographically so that if a successful stable democracy is developed it could have a stabilizing influence on other countries in the area.
So, what do you all think about the premise I've laid out. |
