Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lebell
It is ironic of course that we did not intervene earlier precisely because of people who felt that what was happening in Europe was "none-of-our-business", much like those who have spoken out against the war here.
In other words, damn you, America for not acting sooner, and damn you, America for acting at all.
It grows wearisome.
|
This is the heart of the Iraq argument. How far do you let a cruel dictator go until you finally interviene and remove him. Obviously in WWII Europe waited too long until they were unable to handle the situation and seriously needed help.
How far should we have let Saddam go? Here is what we knew before we invaded (post war intelligence is usless and hindsight is always 20/20).
1. He had already attemped to take over Kuwait and probably would have continued to other countries in the middle east.
2. He had huge amounts of chemical weapons that he already used on Iraqi citizens killing hundreds of thousands.
3. 16 UN resolutions had already been in effect including the last one that said if he still neglected to comply force would be used.
4. Weapons inspectors had been repeatedly kicked out and were unable to go to many locations and interviews scientists was either denied or unfruitful because of the fear of retribution from the scientists by the Iraqi government.
5. Iraq continued to be hostile towards U.S forces in the area, frequently engaging U.S. war planes enforcing the no-fly zones put in place.
6. Saddam was "reimbursing" the families of suicide bombers in Israel.
7. Iraqis that fled to other countries acknowledges the human atrocities by Saddam, his sons, and other military figures to the Iraqi people like raping girls in front of their families, the killing or mutations of men, women, and children, etc.
8. After Afganistan was invaded, it was well known that Al Quida members took up refuge in Iraq, and the fear was them coming across or purchasing WMD from Saddam or other officials.
The U.S. saw a major growing threat and went to the U.N. to get a resolution to get approval for the use of force. The resolution was blocked by 3 coutries that we later find out was involved finacially with Iraq and was being bribed by means of the Oil for Food Program.
We saw the opportunity to remove the Saddam regime before he became an imminant threat and took the opportunity given all of the available information we had.
If France, Germany, and Russia had been involved do you really think that the outcome of the war would have been any differnt? There would still be the same situation with insurgents trying to prevent Iraq from becoming a democracy.