Majority of Americans say Invading Iraq Was Not Necessary

Kerry's got a plan?

 

I think it is different to ask whether something is necesary or to ask whether it is the right thing to do.

Maybe if there is a dictator who is a homicidal maniac who rapes and tortures his people, seeks weapons of mass destruction and has used them in the past against his people and against neighboring countries and has invaded neighboring countries, it was not necesary to invade his country.

Maybe if this particular dictator happens to be sitting on the second largest deposit of the resource that makes the world economy go round, and so has the resources to become dangerous to the whole world, rather than just to his poor subjects and neighbors, it still was not necesary to invade his country.

Maybe if this particular dictator sits in the middle of the most unstable part of the world, and his very presence is an obstacle to ever achieving stability, it still was not necesary to invade his country.

Maybe if this particular dictator is a sworn enemy of the United States, and maybe if he has tried to murder an American president, it still was not necesary to invade his country.

Maybe if America, in the past, was partly responsible for helping to feed the monster that became this dictator, and maybe if America, in the past, had promised to the people of his country that it would help them get rid of this dictator, but reneged on its promise, to the point that many people lost their lives due to America's failure to act; maybe even then it still was not necesary to invade his country.

Of course it was not necesary to invade Iraq. But it was the right thing to do.

 

That would be a neat conspiracy theory, except for the fact that the 'bad intel' predates the Bush presidency.

 

It is legitimate, as ratdog does, to question the motives that the US leadership may have had for removing Hussein. In war and politics there are usually ulterior motives. I am sure that President Bush had reasons to remove Hussein which were not the stated ones, just like Jacques Chirac had reasons to defend Hussein's regime which were not the stated ones.

But having said that, I believe that the fact that there may have been questionable ulterior motives does not in any way alter the more significant fact that removing Hussein and the Baathist party was the right thing to do. It was in the best interest of Iraq and in the best interest of the middle east and of the whole world. It should have been approved by the UN. I think that the attempt by France and others to obstruct America in order to keep the Baathists thugs in power was despicable and the US was right to ignore it.

If people could only separate the significance of what the US and the coalition are accomplishing in Iraq from their personal hatred and distrust of our president, the liberation of Iraq should really be a bipartisan issue which unites us rather than divides us. This should not be at all about president Bush, and whatever motives, real or imagined, we might ascribe to him.

What America is doing in Iraq is an endeavor that trascends president Bush and it trascends partisan politics. It is an effort that should, (and I am confident that it will), be taken to its completion regardless of which party wins power in November. I am confident that Senator Kerry understands that this was the right course of action, and that if he wins he will make every effort to keep the course. Kerry is now careful not to say much, because he realizes that in order to win he needs the support of some people who just don't get it when it comes to Iraq. But those who think US policy towards Iraq will change will be dissapointed if Kerry wins.

We cannot seriously equate the effort in Iraq with some other American actions from the past. I presume ratdog means to compare it to American involvement in support of right wing dictators, like the incidents in Chile for example. But this is very different. America in Iraq did not help remove a legitimate elected leader, like Salvador Allende. They helped liberate a people from an illegal regime which was killing and torturing them and had waged war on its neighbors and brought instability to the world.

What is happening in Iraq is precisely the opposite of the disruption of democracy and the establishment of a right wing dictatorship like Pinochet's Chile. The effort under way is meant to bring freedom and democracy to the country. It may succeed in its lofty goals, or perhaps not, but it has already succeeded in removing the murderous dictator.

I realize that mistakes were made in the process, and it is unfortunate taht some Americans behaved in a despicable way. What happened at the Iraqi prision was a black eye for America.

But Americans should not dwell so much on those few regretable incidents that they miss the significance of the great accomplishment that was the liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein and the Baathist regime. I believe that America will stay the course regardless of who wins in November, and that freedom will ultimately succeed in Iraq. I believe that this effort will succeed, because I see freedom and democracy as values that most people all over the world, including Iraqis desire for themselves. I believe that the day will come when Iraqis will look back at this turbulent days and will see them as a proud beggining of a new era. And Americans will look back and be proud of what their country was able to accomplish.