War on the Horizon
I’ve avoided talking about the war with Iraq. Part of the reason is surely personal. Most of my regular readers, many of which reside on the other side of the political fence, likely disagree with my thoughts. Still, I’m not usually one to shy away from debate. The second, and more major, part of the reason is laziness. I haven’t had the time or inclination to grasp the many thoughts in my head and use the force necessary to translate them into something resembling coherent sentences. But I can’t simply ignore one of the more significant events of my time, especially when I consider this blog somewhat of a diary (sheww, don’t tell anyone – it makes me sound girly). So, here goes. I’ll try to make it quick.
I’m for a war on Iraq because the last one is not yet over.
I want to get the preemptive strike talk out of the way first. If Iraq were just some random country toiling on nasty weapons in seclusion (and let’s face it, who isn’t), the argument for war would hold much less weight. We can’t attack another country simply because we believe they may be a threat to us in the future. The bully can’t take lunch money from the nerd just because he heard that he was saving for a gun. It wouldn’t be right. Premonition as an instrument of war is a dangerous toy.
But that isn’t an accurate description of Iraq (except for the toiling part). Iraq fought a war in1991 and lost badly. Yes, they lost. They lost despite the fact that tanks didn’t roll into Bagdad. They lost despite the fact they won’t admit it; maybe, just maybe, that is the problem. They pulled pens from their pockets and signed a couple of “agreements”. They agreed to follow the U.N.’s resolutions. We agreed to stop kicking their ass. Those agreements have since been ignored.
That’s brings up point two of the anti-war crowd: there is no proof that Saddam possesses the weapons for which we accuse him. Some believe that he has done what he says. I have a two major problems with that line of thinking: it assumes trust in Saddam Hussein and it assumes a distrust in the United States government. Saddam is the poster child of a madmen, rapidly climbing the ranks of the big boys. If Hitler were around, Saddam would surely have a picture with him on the palace wall. Trusting in him is folly. His own mother may love him but I’d be surprised if that wasn’t one parent who slept with one eye open and a gas mask in the nightstand.
If President Bush tells me Saddam has chemical and biological weapons, I believe him. If he tells me that Saddam is actively attempting to create weapons of mass destruction, I believe him. If for no other reason, the math works out: madman + recent history + no supervision + twelve years of defiance = bad news. All logic points that way. Bush isn’t some guy on a street corner and he isn’t the madman some believe him to be. In this case, he is the messenger. This isn’t the stance of George W. Bush. This isn’t the stance of his daddy. This is the official stance of the United States.
(On the other hand, if he tells me that grass is blue, we might have a little debate. Let’s leave that sexual relation talk at the door. We aren’t talking about Monica this time.)
Colin Powell’s take on this when speaking to the U.N. was eye opening. Look people, I shouldn’t have to tell you this. If your intelligence resources are anything more than incompetent, you should already know.
For me, no direct proof is necessary. I don’t need to know every detail. I’m delegating. There is a reason why they call it intelligence.
So let’s say Iraq has weapons that it shouldn’t. If this isn’t true, why did the U.N. send weapons inspectors to Iraq to begin with? Surely, there isn’t anything to find. We could just head over to the weapons factories (you know, the buildings with the “Weapons Here” signs on the roof) and make sure there isn’t anything more lethal than a pop gun being manufactured. What will more time allow the inspectors to do? If they are actively searching for something, what is it? Why wasn’t twelve years enough?
These weapons exist and we know it. The world knows it, even if you can’t scare France away their white flags long enough to admit it. Saddam, you said you’d rid your country of inhumane weapons. You lied. We can’t leave our children to clean up any mess that you or your offspring would certainly make. We must finish what we started. Call it Desert Storm, part duex.
There are rumors that Iraq is prepared to use chemical and biological weapons against our troops in retaliation – a scary proposition indeed. I can’t help but think the obvious: I thought they did not possess the ability to do so.
