War with Iraq

[mk9750]

What is everyone's opinion on the imminent war with Iraq? I'm not talking about support for our troops, That should be an obvious given. But how about opinions on its validity, and on the likelihood of success?

 

I'd be curious to see how others feel.

 

Mark

[nldscout]

Can you explain what this has to do with scouting? Maybe this is a valid subject for other lists.

[SR540Beaver]

There is no question that Saddam is a bad bad guy. There is no question that he needs to be replaced. The question I struggle with is what business is it of ours? People compare him to Hitler. There are similarites and there are differences. He is not seeking worldwide domination and he isn't trying to exterminate an entire race from the face of the Earth. Is he ruthless and willing to kill his own people for his own reasons? Yes. Is it the Iraqi people's job to revolt and overthrow him or ours? I don't know. Hitler was a threat to every nation on the planet. Saddam is a direct threat to his neighbors. He is a possible indirect threat to other nations. Control of the vast oil reserves in his country make him more of a threat to the world than his weapons do.

 

Would I shed a tear if he were killed 5 minutes from now? No!

 

My fear is that we need to have irrefutable evidence that he is a threat to the US before we go charging in and overthrow him. If we do it because we are suspicious of him or just don't like him, we are sending a message to every other nation that this kind of aggression is acceptable. The Genie will be out of the bottle.

 

Look at nuclear weapons. We built one and we used one. Under the circumstances, it was the right thing to do. It shortened the length of WWII and thereby saved countless lives. But the end result is that we are now trying to prevent other countries from having what we have because we fear they can't use it in a responsible manner. I share that fear. But again, the genie is out of the bottle and you can't put it back in.

 

I do find it interesting that the US is so hep on taking out Saddam and his neighbors....including Israel seem to not be very concerned with him at all.

 

I'll support our troops no matter what. But I'm somewhat with the folks who question the reasoning (or lack thereof) for going to war. This sentiment is shared by liberals and conservatives, democrats and republicans alike. Show me a good, hard, valid reason and I'll back it 100%. If the President can't do that, then I have my reservations.

 

Our actions in Afganistan against the Taliban and Al Queda were justified and I support 100%. We had 2 smouldering buildings for all the convincing you needed. I want the same for Iraq.

[RobK]

kwc57,

 

The question I struggle with is what business is it of ours? ... He is not seeking worldwide domination and he isn't trying to exterminate an entire race from the face of the Earth. Is he ruthless and willing to kill his own people for his own reasons? Yes. Is it the Iraqi people's job to revolt and overthrow him or ours?

 

Remove it from a global perspective. If Saddam were the guy next door and the Iraqi people his wife and children, and he was abusing them, would it be your buisness? Is it only the job of the battered wife and children to revolt and overthrow him? He's not seeking to beat you or your children. Lots of people are quick to unleash child protective services on abusive fathers, why not on "nation beaters"? What's the difference? Does the principle change because of the scale?

 

And we do know he'll beat the neighbor's children. Look what he tried to do to Kuwait.

 

-Rob

[firstpusk]

kwc57

 

I share your concern. I was not unhappy to see us go in to Afganistan. That government was certainly much worse for its people and was actively promoting terrorism.

 

The case for Iraq is not so clear cut. Certainly they have been aggressive. Certainly they have murdered their own citizens. It is interesting to say the least that most of the examples people trot out occurred when they were our ally.

 

Speaking of allies, why the go it alone mentality?

 

Are we taking our eye off of the ball to gratify a family grudge. Are we forgetting about our borderless enemy - terrorists. Beyond that, it is clear that we have a lot of fence mending to do in the middle east. I am not sure how starting a war that is dubiously connected with terrorism helps that situation. Especially when no one in the world with the exception of Tony Blair supports us.

 

This all coming from an administration that came in saying it was not going to be actively involved in the peace process and was not concerned about nuclear non-proliferation.

[mk9750]

It relates to Scouting in that I have four Eagle Scouts who are turning 18 in the next 6 weeks in my Troop. I have 11 Eagle Scouts and two others that have been out of my Troop for 1 - 7 years, two of which are in the military, one in Kuwait. And it relates to Scouting in the same way that both Citizenship of the Nation and Citizenship of the World do.

 

If it is inappropriate for this forum, I apoligize and plead ignorance. I saw a thread concerning supporting our Troops, and felt that my question was on par with that.

 

Mark

[Rooster7]

The case for Iraq is not so clear-cut. Certainly they have been aggressive. Certainly they have murdered their own citizens.

 

Given the last sentence, I'm surprised you do not see a "clear cut" case. Are you willing to turn a blind eye so long as it doesn't directly affect Americans today? Among other things that's pretty short sighted.

 

It is interesting to say the least that most of the examples people trot out occurred when they were our ally.

 

Gee, I guess the United States was somehow responsible. Isn't that the implication? If so, don't hide behind an implication, try to build a case - if you truly have one? Once you do (if you can), explain to me why does that mean we should ignore the situation today.

 

Speaking of allies, why the go it alone mentality?

 

Because, apparently, the rest of the world doesn't have the b*lls to confront evil. Or worse, they hate the United States for being successful and are happy that Iraq might present a threat to us.

 

Are we taking our eye off of the ball to gratify a family grudge.

 

You've got to be kidding. Yeah, I'm still ticked at the Germans because my Dad was a WWII vet.

 

Are we forgetting about our borderless enemy - terrorists.

 

No, we're not. From I've heard, there's plenty of them hiding in Iraq. Furthermore, Hussein thinks they're great guys and is more than willing to stoop to their level. Isn't that obvious? Do you want to pretend that Iraq has been our friend? Do you honestly believe that one day they will embrace the United States as an ally? Do you believe that Hussein want use a nuke if he gets one?

 

Beyond that, it is clear that we have a lot of fence mending to do in the middle east. I am not sure how starting a war that is dubiously connected with terrorism helps that situation. Especially when no one in the world with the exception of Tony Blair supports us.

 

Yeah those British, don't you just hate them? They've only been our most loyal ally for the last 100 years.

 

This all coming from an administration that came in saying it was not going to be actively involved in the peace process and was not concerned about nuclear non-proliferation.

 

So I guess you expect them to ignore whatever their intelligence reports say (a strategy that Clinton apparently embraced), pretend 9-11 never happened, pretend that Hussein will be our friend, and stick their collective heads in the ground and join the rest of the liberals. If Clinton had half the brains hat Bush possesses, Bin Laden would have been apprehended years ago and 9-11 might well have never happened. But hey, he stood for a peaceunfortunately, while he managed to craft an image of himself, his efforts didn't help anyone in the WTC.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[SR540Beaver]

Rooster,

 

Are there not other countries that have nut case dictators?

 

North Korea comes to mind.

 

Are there not other countries that have been killing their own citizens?

 

North Korea comes to mind.

 

Are there not other countries accused of harboring terrorists?

 

North Korea comes to mind.

 

Are there not other countries actively developing nuclear weapons?

 

North Korea comes to mind.

 

Are there not other countries that make up the "Axis of Evil"?

 

North Korea comes to mind.

 

Are there not other countries with allies that pose an actual physical threat to the US and her allies?

 

North Korea comes to mind.

 

Why are we amassing men and material on the Iraqi borders when they have been effectivley contained for over 11 years and unable to wage war, but North Korea isn't a worry to us at all?

 

Saddam might be able to scrounge up enough scud missle part to lob one or two towards Israel. Kim Jong Il has thousands of missles aimed at South Korea and has missles able to easily reach Japan. He admittedly has one or two nuclear warheads he can deliver to either of these countries. Why is the impotent Saddam a threat and the powerful Jong Il not a threat worthy of sending troops?

 

Here we have a guy with nukes and an itchy trigger finger admitting to what he has and another guy that no one seems to be able or willing to shed any light on just how he is a viable threat to the US.

 

As I said, I won't shed a single tear if either of these guys are gone tomorrow. The world will be a better place without them. I have no problem with the US being the country that knocks them off of their pedestal. I just want some hard, cold evidence to justify our aggression and I'm on board 100%. There are even respected conservative Republicans and decorated Generals asking the same questions.

[SR540Beaver]

"Remove it from a global perspective. If Saddam were the guy next door and the Iraqi people his wife and children, and he was abusing them, would it be your buisness? Is it only the job of the battered wife and children to revolt and overthrow him? He's not seeking to beat you or your children. Lots of people are quick to unleash child protective services on abusive fathers, why not on "nation beaters"? What's the difference? Does the principle change because of the scale?

 

And we do know he'll beat the neighbor's children. Look what he tried to do to Kuwait."

 

Robk,

 

If I saw my neighbor beating his wife and kids, I'd most likely try and stop him. If I were "suspicious" that he was beating his wife and kids, I'd most likely call the police or social services.

 

After the Gulf War, Saddam started killing the Kurds. We stepped in and have been there ever since protecting them. We kicked him out of Kuwait. He has in effect been under house arrest for the last 11+ years. How many mass gassings has he done since then or how many countries has he invaded?

 

This coming war is not about him killing his own people. It is built on the suspicion that he is amassing weapons of mass destruction. We called the cops (UN) and they have yet to find any evidence of our suspicions. Hopefully in time they will. In answer to your question, if I have a gut feeling that my neighbor is beating his wife, am I justified in busting down the door of his home and beating the daylights out of him? What will the rest of my neighbors think of me if I jump to that kind of conclusion and action?

 

[KoreaScouter]

If you have children of any age, you should be concerned about crusaders/criminals/crazies anywhere in the world -- this is a marathon, not a sprint; my son is only 12, and we've discussed how he will fulfill his obligation to perform national service someday. Two things are for sure: I don't want it to be here or in the Middle East. I pray every day for a world in which I won't have to have those conversations with him.

 

I can't speak for anyone but myself, however, I believe the Israelis are showing (thankfully) remarkable restraint, so as not to turn this into a Moslem vs. Jewish conflict. They showed the same restraint in 1990/1991, even while 37 Scuds, launched from Iraq, landed on their country.

 

As someone who lives less than 50 miles from the North Korean border, I can assure all of you there's no "concern vacuum" about the situation here. But, the situation is different. For one thing, the major stakeholder in this situation is the Republic of Korea and its 50 million citizens who have national policies, goals, and dreams of reunification. Bottom line: North Korea is not Iraq.

 

MK, you asked about likelihood of success? Militarily, that's not debatable, no matter what we're asked to do or where we're asked to do it. National will and public opinion/support; that may be a bigger determinant of success than military capability. I'm reminded of a quote attributed to, I believe, Thomas Jefferson, when he was asked after the Constitutional Convention what type of government our young nation will have. He replied: "A democracy, if you can keep it."

 

KS

 

 

[firstpusk]

Rooster7,

 

The first thing I want you to understand is that I want Saddam Hussein gone. I wanted him gone in the early 80's when GW's dad viewed him as an ally. We aided them and encouraged the oil kingdoms to aid him. He was our guy right up to the time he went into Kuwait.

 

There has been no solid connection established between bin Laden and Iraq. Stories were floated but they have not panned out.

 

Is the US partly responsible for the problem in Iraq. Yes, their programs for chemical and biological weapons were aided by the US during the Iran-Iraq war.

 

"So I guess you expect them to ignore whatever their intelligence reports say (a strategy that Clinton apparently embraced), pretend 9-11 never happened, pretend that Hussein will be our friend, and stick their collective heads in the ground and join the rest of the liberals. If Clinton had half the brains hat Bush possesses, Bin Laden would have been apprehended years ago and 9-11 might well have never happened. But hey, he stood for a peaceunfortunately, while he managed to craft an image of himself, his efforts didn't help anyone in the WTC."

 

9-11 happened, no one has linked Iraq to it in any way. Clinton did not stick his head in the sand. It is interesting that the one of the first thing Bush did was to tell the FBI to leave the Saudis alone. The same Louis Freeh FBI conservatives were lauding for going after Clinton dropped the ball in Mpls and Phoenix. You of course will believe anything GW says. But why did he and his administration threaten everyone about investigating 9-11? Why did he seek to appoint the master liar and unindicted war criminal Henry K to investigate? And why did Ashcroft stop flying commercial a couple months before 9-11?

 

I am not saying they intentionally allowed it to happen, but I think you and your so-called "liberal" media would be screaming bloody murder if this had occurred on Clinton's watch.

[Rooster7]

kwc57,

 

Okay, you go home and find a man who doesn't belong there. Do you approach that man any differently if he's holding a gun verses no weapon at all? Now you know the difference between Iraq and North Korea. North Korea is holding that gun, it's called a nuclear . I'm sure there's a lot more to it (and perhaps Korea Scouter might give us more insight). Regardless, I think my point is valid.

[SR540Beaver]

ahhhhh, I get it, we're going to beat up the weakling because we know he can't fight back and be afraid of the stronger guy.....which we actually happen to be much stronger than

 

The point is, NK is a serious threat to us and the world. Saddam has been under our thumb for 12 years and is contained. NK is the greater threat. Our resources nned to be pointed in that direction.

[KoreaScouter]

Here's the web address of a transcript of a speech by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz in New York City recently...may help put the Iraq situation in some perspective.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,76427,00.html

 

KS

[YoungBlood]

We had 2 smouldering buildings for all the convincing you needed. I want the same for Iraq.

 

kwc57, I hope that you really don't mean you want to wait for two more smouldering buldings to convince you that Saddam needs to be dealt with now. I would think that acting now would prevent another 9/11 and that is why I support the U.S. in taking action with Iraq.