It would appear that the Shrub Administration is beginning to beat the drums of war with increasing volume, making the case for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein. Yesterday, National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice threw her hat in the ring, making a "moral" case for going to war.
The United States and other nations have little choice but to seek the removal of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said in a interview broadcast Thursday, citing "a very powerful moral case" for action.
Rice's comments represent one of the strongest and most detailed explanations by a senior U.S. official about the need to oust Saddam, and they follow a drumbeat of news stories about potential U.S. plans for a military invasion of the Persian Gulf nation....
"This is an evil man who, left to his own devices, will wreak havoc again on his own population, his neighbors and, if he gets weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them, on all of us," Rice said. "There is a very powerful moral case for regime change."
It does seem interesting that the volume of stories in the mainstream media seems to be on the increase. Does the American public really need to be prepared for another war? Why is it that when I hear these arguments, I'm reminded of Josef's Goebbels' "Big Lie": repeat something often enough and it becomes the truth?
I've said this before, but I'll gladly say it again: why is it the responsibility of the United States to take out Saddam? This is a man whose government has committed no overt act of hostility against the US or US interests. That's not to say that he is a good man or a benevolent dictator, because neither is true. Why, though, has the Shrub Administration made it the sole responsibility of the US to take him out?
There are a few points that I think are being missed here:
- What of international law and our supposed commitment to it? How can invading a country that has committed no hostile act against the US be justified? Or is this just another case of the Shrub Administration practicing situational ethics?
- If the situation is so dire that an invasion IS warranted, where are our allies? Why is the rest of the West almost unanimous in condemning any potential invasion of Iraq?
- What are the crimes that Saddam and his regime are guilty of? Until the Shrub Administration lays out their case, we are left to take them at their word. I'm sorry, but the "Trust me, I'm President" argument just doesn't wash. Tell us WHY we should be going to war and what purpose will be served.
- What is the exit strategy? If we are to put our sons and daughters into harm's way, what is the plan to get them out? I realize that setting a strict timeline is impractical, but we need to have some idea of how long we can expect a war to continue.
- Is the US military prepared to occupy Iraq? Being an occupying force is not necessarily the task our military is trained for? Are we prepared for the possibility of protracted guerilla warfare and the casualties sure to be associated with it?
- What about the task of nation-building? Iraq is a country with no democratic tradition, and no experience with the rule of law. Creating the conditions under which those things will thrive will not be easy, nor will it happen quickly.
- Assuming we invade Iraq, and assuming we "clean things up", who is next? Once we start down this road, the temptation to do it again will certainly become easier to succumb to. Do we invade Zimbabwe? Robert Mugabe is every bit the despot and tyrant that Saddam Hussein is. Where, then, do we draw the line?
I would stress again that I am NOT defending Saddam Hussein, nor am I denying a moral responsibility to remove a foreign leader who might present a legitimate threat. At what point, though, do we as a country have the right and responsibility to remove a leader, and what defines that threat? Also, given that the rest of the "civilized" world is opposed to the invasion, do we simply ignore their counsel as inconvenient and plow ahead with our plans?
I am profoundly uncomfortable with the "plans" and "reasons" for invading Iraq that have been put forward by the Shrub Administration. The arguments made thus far do not, in my mind, meet any reasonable burden of proof, and I'm not willing to meekly succumb to the "Trust me, I'm President" argument. Shrub has to date proved himself to be a self-interested, shallow, and narrow-minded leader. I don't want that kind of leader dragging this nation into a war we don't deserve.
