onetime2

I won't bother to comment on Moore's opinions since he obviously has his own agenda and nothing Bush does will ever be right in his mind.

Was it about the well being of the Iraqi people? Partially, as a means to an end. By creating a viable democratic economy in Iraq a destabilizing force is created among the governments in the region that repress religious minorities and women. Allowing all ethnic groups and both sexes to participate in the political process is a major goal in the new government. I have little doubt some countries in the region fear the effect that a democratic Iraq will have on their grip of power within their own borders.

Other reasons for the Iraq war include proving to countries who support terrorism that they may just have something to lose in all this if they don't get on our team. If Bush followed up his speech about "you're either with us or against us" with yet more economic sanctions that have little effect on the regimes in power, how much cooperation would we have gotten? The same is true of going into Afghanistan.

Certainly the policies we've tried in the past haven't gotten us anywhere. Our role as the only superpower, our reliance on oil, and our long standing relationship with Israel will continue to draw us into the conflicts in the Middle East. Bush's primary motivations are to disrupt the terrorist networks in the short time by denying them outright help from many of their usual sources. Long term the fight against terrorism comes from eliminating at least some of the terrorists labor pools by giving them much more hope for the future.

Is this the right strategy? WIll it succeed? Only time will tell. I do know that it is a far better strategy than the deafening silence I hear for alternatives. There's a lot of "this is wrong because" and very little "here is what we should be doing to fight terrorism".