From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 14:57:00 GMT
Hi Platt, (Andy)
>> As someone who loves freedom, I consider this a very small consolation
>> prize. We did not go to Iraq to capture a tyrant. We went there to rid
>> Iraq of WMD which we were lied to about.
>
> Not true.
This is not simply a case of "liberal media bias" We heard the case for war
on Iraq directly from the President's mouth. We went to war because of an
immanent threat to US security because of Iraqi stores and production of
WMDs. Iraqi freedom was part of the initial rhetoric as an aside--an added
bonus. It was only after the invasion and no weapons were found that
bringing Democracy to Iraq was emphasized. It became our primary purpose
after the fact.
Personally, I had mixed feelings about the invasion. I could have been sold
on it had it been billed as a war to "capture a tyrant" and bring Democracy
to an oppressed people, but I think such a war could not have been sold to
Congress or the majority of Americans. Conservatives needed to hear that we
had a stake in it and wouldn't have been sold on helping the poor Iraqis.
Liberals would have bristled at the idea of imposing our values on Iraq. An
immanent threat was required for both camps.
I agree with our founding fathers that a government without the consent of
the people is not a legitimate government and that we should do what we can
to spread Democracy throughout the world. Though I share cynicism about the
Bush administration's motives, I am certain that removing Saddam was a good
thing and hopeful that we will help to rebuild a better Iraq.
>> We went there because we were
>> told Iraq posed an "immenent threat " to the freedom of Americans.
>
> Not true.
True. As I explained.
>> We
>> went there because we were told of a connection between Iraq and 9/11,
>> which was proved a lie.
>
> Not true.
Sort of true. This certainly was billed as part of the war on terrorism and
connections between Saddam and Osama were suggested but unproved. I don't
think we can pin the Bush admin down on any lies even on WMDs (they were
wrong, but we may not have been deliberately misled. I sure hope not,
anyway).
> We went there to root out and destroy terrorists--a biological blight
> on humanity.
Since the WMDs were not found nor any evidence that Iraq planned terrorist
attacks on the US as far as we know there was no terrorist threat before the
invasion. There certainly are terrorists in Iraq after the invasion,
however.
>Yesterday, we captured one of the worst terrorists in
> history, right up there with Mao, Stalin and Hitler.
Agreed. The difference between Saddam and those three and many other
dictators is simply a matter of scale.
>The fight will
> continue as long as one terrorist remains. And rightly so.
We need to fight for Democracy rather than simply fight against terrorism.
Bringing those who use terrorist tactics to justice is only a small part of
that good fight. (I'm reminded of our fight against Communism in Latin
America in the 70's and 80's that was often quite the opposite of a fight
for Democracy.)
Regards,
Steve
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 15 2003 - 19:42:17 GMT