While I share the sentiment that we should have done the job the first time, rather than blame Bush I, blame the UN. The mandate was to remove Iraq from Kuwait, not remove Hussein from power. Another example of how following the U.N. creates more problems in the long run.
As for waiting for more allies, they have about two weeks to get onboard. We don’t need them, really, as far as actual participants goes. It would be nice for them to recognize the service that we are providing to the world. My personal opinion is that the “war” will not be on a scale approaching what seems to be feared by many. If we go in with the stated goal of removing Hussein, don’t be suprised if we get his head on a platter handed to us in the first 48 hours. It is my further opinion that the well publicized buildup of troops and ships is a smokescreen for the real assault, which will 1) eliminate Hussein and his leadership 2)secure the oil fields from sabotage and 3) secure known WMD sites that are capable of launching retaliatory strikes.
count me in too…i like to think of myself as a ‘doish hawk’ on this one but yeah…kick sadam’s ass all over the place. i respect the anti-war camps arguments but the world nneds to get some cojones u know? this aoid-war-at-all costs is really sissylike.
I do believe we are in a “rush to war” which is not a good thing. I don’t believe this has truly been thought out. After the war is over what is going to fill the vacuum? Is the US going to permantly occupy Iraq? Are the Kurds in the north going to sieze power? The Shias in the south? Even the Bathists will still have a big power base. If you believe these people will come together and work together for the common good, well, you don’t know the region very well. And what of the money? Gulf War One cost around 150 billion dollars and we didn’t even go to Bagdad! What is this one going to cost? How much have we already spent in preparing for this war? Bush’s budget did not include a dime for this war. Where is this money going to come from? My pocket? Your pocket? So you can put me in the no war corner. I do agree however that something needs to be done about Saddam. Like was mentioned in another thread, keep the inspectors there forever.Pass a resolution that says he must feed his people. Harrass the hell out of him. Flood the country with inspectors. Much less costly in both money and lives. War should be the very last choice after all other possibilties have been exhausted.
I think we should try to do everythign in our power to resolve things peacefully, but if we do go to war, at least I’ll be prepared. Dad bought gas masks for the whole family! Whee!!
It fell upon the U.S. to take a leading role in the Cold War, which was a global chess game. Local alliances were called for all over the world, and as often as not, there were only poor choices to be made. The greater game ruled, and round one was finally decided. That left us with quite a bit of messy history to clean up.
Alliances with less than great governments were an unfortunate necessity in bringing the Cold War to a conclusion that allowed all of the world to move ahead without the shadow of the Evil Empire adumbrating their future, so the argument that the members of the UN are being asked to make a military commitment to solve a problem created by another nation is, at best, a bit simplistic.
Reluctantly, as war is not my preferred diplomatic channel, I must agree that we have pretty much run out of alternatives. While we now must, most likely (the next three weeks hold are pregnant with dramatic potential), take up the gun, current events are not realistically described as a “rush to war.” The problem’s been festering for a while now, and the peaceful diplomatic efforts are just about played out.
Would it have been simpler to have just said “pro?”
But I don’t think that the US will be able to ultimately contain this war. And this war is likely to trigger off further conflicts. That’s why I’m anti.
What’s wrong with bribing a couple of the Republican Guards with money/US citizenship for their family in exchange for this deed ?
And as for Germany, we need to pull up our military stakes and get out completely. Also, if Canada and Mexico vote to remain ‘neutral’, tear that NAFTA agreement to shreds - I’ve been opposed to it all along anyway.
But already it isn’t. The US and UK have other nations on their side, too, like Australia, Turkey, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Denmark, Romania, Poland, and pretty much the rest of Eastern Europe (10 nations signed soliditary with the US in the “Vilnius Ten” letter).
I was going to write something long about imperialism, but to hell with it.
Blast the SOB into next week so that the Kurds can feel unthreatened, so the Euphrates Valley nomads can have their land back, so every Iraqi has free speech, so political executions stop…
…but lets not stop there. During the war in Bosnia the UN did something it hadn’t before: step into a civil war rather than one between nations. There is a mighty lengthy list of other places in this world where human rights need defending by military force.
Sadly the UN hasn’t the courage to intervene on behalf of the helpless in Iraq as it did in Bosnia and I fear that we in the west wouldn’t stomach having our peacekeepers dying to save people we know nothing about.
I’m an independant with Libertarian leanings – I am (sheepishly) pro.
No matter what decisions are made regarding war with Iraq, there are going to be bad consequences. I think (hope?) that us – be that with out without full UN support – going in and taking out Saddam will have the least long term repercussions.