Americans are dying in Iraq as never before and there is no end in sight to the carnage. Isn’t it time to ask why we are fighting? According to those who lead us we are fighting terrorism, but are we? Following destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11 this nation declared a war on terrorism. Eventually the focus of this war shifted from its titular head Osama Ben Laden, to Iraq and its notorious leader Saddam Hussein.
Our reasons for launching a pre-emptive war against Iraq was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, was preparing to use them against us and/or supply them to terrorist organizations. As established recently on 60 Minutes II, none of this is true and at the time of our attack Iraq was not even a threat to its immediate neighbors, much less the United States.
Now we are being told that we must stay the course in Iraq because it is the honorable thing to do, because we are fighting terrorism, and because of the need to build a free and democratic nation there. In consideration of the fact that we invaded Iraq for surreptitious and fabricated reasons, it is now fair to examine the validity of these reasons.
To be sure, if we wrongfully invaded Iraq, we have an obligation to help the Iraqi people rebuild their nation and what better government to help install than a democracy? The problem with this is no one in our government seems willing to ask if the Iraqi people want our help in this regard or if they want to live under a democratic form of government similar to ours. If they do not, then our desire to “do the right thing” reeks of hypocrisy and self-serving delusion.
At this point, it is fair to ask who we are fighting in Iraq. Our government would have us believe it is a small minority of Iraqis still loyal to Saddam Hussein bolstered by foreign radical elements. While there is undoubtedly an element of truth in this, it is also true that many of those we are presently fighting are Iraqis who had no use for Saddam Hussein and who view Americans as a foreign invading force which must be expelled at all cost. This being the case, some of those radical foreign elements now become freedom fighters helping their Muslim brothers expel the “Great Satan” from their midst.
Which view is the predominant one? This question will be moot if we prevail, but it is also true that if the latter is the case, then our chances of “prevailing” are slim and we face a long and very costly occupation in Iraq where the outcome is doubtful. Under these circumstances, blindly staying the course we are on is not only foolish but tragic as well.
If we simply pulled out of Iraq next week, what would happen. In the worst case scenario, Saddam Hussein would return to power and set up his old government. While this thought is terrible to us, it is not so terrible in consideration of the fact that we had no business deposing him in the first place. Another “unacceptable” possibility is that radical religious elements take over. While this thought is also terrible to us, should it be if that is the kind of government the Iraqi people wish to have? Aren’t we the ones who subscribe the principle of self-determination? The questions that must be asked here is that if these worst case scenarios come to pass, is that so bad for America and what cost in American lives is worth paying to ensure that these eventualities do not happen?
We pride ourselves on freedom of choice. In Iraq, to save face and uphold our honor, we are denying freedom of choice to the Iraqi people. The bottom line is that we have no business being there and we have no business being self-appointed policemen of the world. If being honorable is truly our goal, then the only honorable thing to do in Iraq is cut our losses and bring our troops home.
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]