|
Oh, I guess I should state my opinion on the matter. I don't think the question here is whether we should pull out of Iraq or not. Obviously we cannot do that, nor do I think we should.
The statement that sparked this debate was a rhetorical device. What I would like to see, which was reflected nicely in a conservative's column, is for the administration to come clean on our reasons for being in Iraq.
The entire thing has been handled through a veil of misinformation and manipulation of the public opinion. Non-existant "weapons of mass destruction" (I'm getting so sick of that term), the subtly implied (and also non-existant) link between Saddam and Al Qaeda. People who supported the war befor we went in said nothing about liberating the Iraqi population. The average American thought we should "nuke em all" in fact, not even understanding that Iraqi civilians were being oppressed by a cruel dictatorship. The stated reasons for going to war was that Iraq presented an imminent threat to the national security of the United States. We now know this to be patently false, and evidence dictates that the administration knew this and played it up anyway to the public to gain approval for its actions.
The administration has played the general public like a finely tuned instrument. It makes me angry. Do I think there may be good reasons to overthrow an oppressive dictator? Of course! But if we are going to discuss this honestly, the first step is to admit that we didn't go into Iraq to liberate Iraqis. If that were our goal, there are many other countries whose leaders are guilty of human rights violations that far exceed those of Saddam's.
__________________
Nizzle
|