Another of Italy's best respected theologians has attacked the American effort in Iraq as being mostly motivated by an unquenchable thirst for oil. He also says there is no real threat against the U.S. posed by Saddam Hussein. He fears dreadful results in the region. He sees too many bombings of civilians, even though precision bombs are used. He especially resents the failure of the U.S. to obtain the support of the United Nations Security Council. For all these reasons, he thinks the American war is unjust, immoral, and illegal.

All these arguments seem so manifestly false to me that they force me to look for clues to his inability to see reality straight. What is the source of the bias that distorts his vision?

Of course, I know by experience that many in Europe think as he does. But why? Why do so many Europeans see the world in that unusual and plainly distorted way?

No doubt, Europeans could explain that to me better than I can understand it myself. But it seems to me that Europeans are living in a kind of welfare paradise, which they are not willing to give up. Since 1945, they have by and large been content for the people of the United States to pay the huge expenses of defending them from the Soviet Union and other threats. Meanwhile, they have concentrated on building a prosperous and comfortable life, at a level of popular wealth never known before in the history of Europe.

The Europeans do not wish to spend for military defense. Therefore, they have adopted a new philosophy of peace, reliance on the United Nations and the European Community, and comfort in their own military weakness. By these means, they hope to overcome the heritage of past wars within Europe.

This leaves the United States to deal with the forces of disorder and hatred being spewed out by the doctrine of Wahhabism, nurtured in the bosom of certain Islamic countries. This doctrine teaches terrorism and subversion, along with a national socialist philosophy of social organization. It has inspired the Baath party of Iraq, the Taliban in Afghanistan, the ruling party in Sudan, the madrassas of Pakistan and above all Saudi Arabia, and others.

The United States of course is not alone in facing the dangers bred by this doctrine. It is working with a shifting 'coalition of the willing,' now including some 46 nations, including a majority of those in Europe.

In this respect, Europe and America seem to have exchanged philosophical positions. Europe used to be the Continent more attuned to the evils of history, more hardheaded, less 'innocent' in its outlook, more sophisticated and even cynical, whereas the United States appeared to be all too 'innocent' and inexperienced, too naive and hopeful.

Now it is the Europeans who seem carried away by illusions of peace and lawfulness and order, whereas the United States is newly disillusioned, hardheaded, clear-eyed, and determined to oppose the evil, disorder, and danger that keeps advancing against the civilized world.

Whatever the drifting apart of Europe from America, the charges against the war deserve to be met head on.

(1) The Coalition has already declared that the oil of Iraq will be placed in trust for the people of Iraq, preserved intact by the valor and quick action of their liberators. It will not be seized by the Americans or any other foreign power. (If the United States thirsted for Iraqi oil, it could have seized it in 1991 at the time of the first Iraq world. We are not that sort of power. European nations should know that from their own experience with Americans after 1945. We do not conduct ourselves as conquerors. We did request enough land to bury our dead.)

(2) The threat to the United States and Europe hidden in Iraq lies in small bottles and tiny vials of chemical and biological substances that, if released by a skillful terrorist in the right conditions, could bring about the horrible death of thousands -- as in a subway train or a skyscraper or a hotel air conditioning system. The raid on the al Qaeda camp in northern Iraq at the end of March was bitterly contested, but ended with the capture of many boxes of files and computers and clear evidence of the creation of Ricin and other deadly chemical agents.

(3) As the people of Iraq lose their fear of Saddam and his death squads, they are more and more speaking up about the tortures they have endured for the last 25 years. Many of them cheer the arrival of Coalition forces. Arabs of the Middle East saw the tumultuous welcome given by the Afghans to their liberators, and they will watch developments in a free Iraq closely. The leading Shia Muslim clerics have warmly welcomed the Coalition troops, and extended help in identifying their former Baath-party oppressors.

(4) The Coalition has gone to unprecedented lengths to keep civilian casualties to a minimum. They have been uncommonly low, even if one accepts the preposterously inflated figures put out by the Iraqi information office. When hostilities have ended, a true accounting will be rendered. This will include evidence of the civilians killed through deliberate Iraqi actions. It will be seen that there were no civilian deaths ever deliberately committed by the Coalition, and that extraordinary care was taken to keep unintended deaths and injuries as low as humanly possible, even when Coalition forces were put at risk to do so.

(5) There have been scores of military actions since the founding of the United Nations. Only two or three have been submitted for approval by the Security Council. A threatened Russian veto blocked U.N. approval for the humanitarian intervention in Kosovo. The French did not seek such approval for their intervention in the Ivory Coast, nor did Russia for its war in Chechnya.

The massacre in Rwanda failed to move the Security Council. In short, the actions or inactions of the Security Council are no full measure of either morality or legality, and have never been so.

The United States has led a mighty coalition of nearly 50 nations in a just and morally necessary war, whose humanitarian role in liberating a great people from the barbarity of a cruel dictator will become ever clearer as more and more of Saddam's victims are heard from in coming days.

Many who early opposed the war will come to see that it was, in fact, of great moral worth. It will come to be seen as extraordinarily important, too, for its good political effects in the future development of the Middle East, and in the increasing pressure put upon international terrorists, as they are driven from one base of operations after another.

error

error

I want to start by saying that I am impressed by your post and the extent of serious thought put into it. It's nice to see an argument for war that does not consist of "Support the Troops! Proud to be an American! and Must Follow Bush Anywhere!" and other empty slogans. The essence of America is the right to question your government and officials, look at them critically, and participate anyway you can. Our founding fathers were revolutionaries, they believed the country they were building should be constantly reinvented, a revolution every five years even. The type of debate you have instigated and put forth is truly American and I salute you.
I don't agree with you though...
"The Europeans should know from their experience with the US..." or maybe they should know from the experience of the South Americans, particularly Colombia. US Military presence in Colombia helps out the US corporations that are "liberating" the oil for the Colombian people. The odd thing is that the Colombian people continued to sky rocket into poverty despite this valuable resource in their midst. And the drug cartels were kept in power because they were friendly to our military presence, despite our "War on Drugs".
The saviours of the universe role you have the US playing in this war is again a little blind. Is it really democracy if we place our choice of people in power without consulting the people? Look at the beautiful job we did of freeing Afganistan from the Taliban, a war we swore was not at all about the people, who we have now entirely abandoned without aid other than a military presence to chase terrorists, killing yet another 8 civilians today. By accident, sure, but does the fact that the plane was supposed to bomb another place make much difference to a dead family? Would it make a difference to you?
When these Iraqis step out from under this oppressive rule to share the horrors they've seen, many might include the horrific lack of medical supplies, food, clean drinking water, waste treatment facilities and in general the vast lack of infastructure we left them with at the end of the first Gulf War, there after imposing sanctions making it impossible for them to repair. Oh, but Saddam did all that, if he'd just caved, then his people would be happy. Well, since the sanctions totally ravaged his people whyile his fantastically wealthy self just got to grow stronger, the logic of keeping them up is sort of lost. Were we hoping his own people might overthrow him? Most of them were to busy dying of waterborne illness or starvation, not the best way to build a revolutionary army.
The country in the world with the most dangerous military, arms, and known chemical weapons in the world that violates many a treaty, terrifies many a country, and has been the largest stumbling block towards a new treaty to control nuclear weapons is the US. Many European nations say that the country they feel most threatened by is not Iraq (we're talking countries within range of Iraq here) but is the US.
If oil has nothing to do with this, then why Iraq? Why now? What about North Korea? They are screaming about their fancy new weaponry actually within range of the US. They too share the list of human rights violations. There are plenty of other regimes perpatrating crimes far worse than Saddam Hussein. And don't tell me terrorist and September 11. The "why" for Sept. 11 that people searched for, the reason that the terrorists hate us is basically this war on Iraq. The interference of the US in the Middle East, the frequent promises of military support for revolutionary groups to topple people like Saddam and then the US re-negging just at the moment they are needed most. On Oct. 7, 2001 Ossama Bin Laden set forth this explanation. They don't hate us because we have such a free American life style with skimpy clothes and Hollywood, they hate us because we fucked up their region and continue to do so.
I'm not pro Saddam. Binary logic does not apply in the real world, the only two options are not Bush and Saddam. I support the troops, some of them are my friends, I dont' think they belong in Iraq right now, and I refuse to be mislead by an Administration that cuts their Veterans benefits and takes away funding to elementary schools for their children at the same time he's sending them off to die. And I am proud to be an American, to try to pay as much attention as possible to the actions of my governement, to practice my right to free speech, and to care about what happens to the people of America.
Thanks again for initiating a valuable exchange of ideas.

I made my previous post before seeing the pictoral ones. You're being handed an intellectual argument with numerous points and a scatalogical "fuck you" picture is the best you can do? Yeah, I'm sure thousands of Bush supporters are burning their flags this minute. People think the anti-war movement is a bunch of flakes, but we are the ones with history and facts on our sides. I can understand sinking to the level of other Bush supporter posts that rival your own posts here, but if that's the best you can do when faced with a well formed argument then the movement is doomed. Read books by historians unafraid to tell the truth, like Howard Zinn, or political analysts not backed by GE like Noam Chomsky, actually engage people in conversation and debate. Start out easy with "Addicted to War" which just made the NY Times best seller's list in the top ten non-fiction. "Fuck you" never changed anyone's mind.
And if any of you feel like doubting my commitment to peace, come to the arraignment for my civil disobedience arrest.

Sunny, I'm confused.

You claim to have history on your side. Care to elaborate?

You claim to be committed to "Peace". One wonders if you could explain your definition of the word.

Oh, and could you kindly explain to those millions of Iraqis who are breathing free for the first time in their lives how they should be returned to a condition of terrorized servitude, desolation, and murder?

You've got some serious work to do on your brain, little girl.

is that in an effort to make Bush look legitimate, you have made the assertion that saving money and promoting peace through non violent means are a bad thing to do. You speak of militarization as if Sadam wasn't our fault to begin with, we should have saved money and not made stupid arms deals in the first place. We should have saved money and lives in Viet Nam, we should have saved Russians money and lives by leaving them alone too. We should have saved money by not paying stupid CIA agents to mess with Cuba, we should have saved money by not testing mustard gas on soldiers, we should have saved money by not using Depleted Uranium causing Gulf War syndrome, we should have saved money by not letting the pentagon take our kids education money away to waste it giving weapons to murderers and then shaking their hands, most of all, we should have saved the people in the World Trade Center with all the money and tehnology we paid for, but we didn't.
We don't save much, and every country in history that we have tried to save has hated us in the end for it with the exception of WWII which we waited too long to save a significant amount of people to enter.
We could learn a lot from Europe, they know how to save face. The road to hell is paved with the U.S.'s good intentions.

Mymicz, you've got the equation exactly backwards.

It is BECAUSE we spend money on defense and foreign aid that we won the cold war. You act as if the United States operates in a vacuum and all the other countries of the world are merely reacting to us.

The cold war was a conflict that pitted us against an aggressive Communist adversary who spent lavishly to subvert the governments of dozens of countries. In EVERY SINGLE CASE they butchered and starved the people of these countries.

The money you would have had us spend on education and social welfare wouldn't have bought us very much. With the military defeat and subsequent subjugation of the Western Europeans and Americans - and the imposition of Communism - there would be no money.

The miracle of Capitalism and Democracy is that there is so much independent productivity outside of the government's control, that large sums don't need to be spent by the government on various programs. The profit motive drives entrepreneurs to solve problems and create opportunites that would have to be handled (hamfistedly) by a government agency otherwise.

America is #1 in every single field of human endeavor. It is so because of it's governmental model and it's economic model.

The Europeans you speak so glowingly of - I suppose you mean the Germans and the French. You will soon see the penalty for perfidy. Schroeder is finished. Chirac may survive, but his relevance has evaporated. England will now dominate the EU, or perhaps leave it.

"In the councils of government, we must guard against
the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military- industrial complex."
          President Dwight D. Eisenhower Farewell Address January 17, 1961

"A billion here, a billion there, sooner or later it adds up to real money."
          U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen

I was looking for that quote, and as for rightie, listen up, we could have spent that money making America safe, here, on our land, and let the Russians worry about defending themselves. My mother will tell you how good things were in Russia, she has a laundry list of horror stories. But, I beg you to ask how the African Americans felt around the same time, with lynchings and segregation or how the Native Americans felt and feel today. This high and mighty attitude will not excuse Americans for their past misdeeds, learning only to hate and McCarthyize everyone and everything instead of following international laws of peace as they were agreed upon by our governments. This is what we should have done, tell me, what's so wrong about peace love and understanding?

Mymicz, you are slipping into incoherance.

Stay on subject, son.

The legacy of slavery in this country and the struggles of the black minority here have absolutely nothing to do with the conduct of the cold war. If you want to discuss civil rights, I'll be happy to. But to drag them into this conversation is just a smoke screen you lay down to cloud your weak arguments.

The Soviet Union was not about to "live and let live" so your notion that we could have spent our money to make ourselves 'safe' would have manifested itself how exactly?

By advocating that we protect ourselves within our borders (presumably with your magic super-death ray gun) necessitates the surrender of our European and Asian allies. Keep in mind, the Russians had every intention of subverting and dominating these countries. But screw them, they can take care of themselves, right?

Your reference to McCarthy is funny. McCarthy exposed bunches of bought-and-paid-for Communists who operated in the government and in Hollywood. His methods were crude, he was a bully. He was also right.

..yer evil forever. That seems to sum up the Left's attitude to the United States; that the misdeeds of all previous generations are on the heads of the current one.

Hypothetical situation: your great-grandfather was a horse thief. Everyone knew it then; everyone knows it now. But he was never arested, tried, or convicted.

The sherrif comes knocking on your door. "Mr Left, you're under arrest for stealing horses."

"Wait! I'm not a horse thief! My great-grandfather was, but I'm not!"

The sherrif replies, "Doesn't matter. You have the right to remain silent, you have the..."

And that is exactly what the Left is doing to the United States. We here today are being held responsible for the sins of our fathers. Has anyone here owned a slave? No. Did anyone here order the Bay of Pigs invasion? No. Did anyone here send troops to Vietnam? No. Yet, somehow, we are still responsible.

If you don't like what's going on now, and who's doing it, fine. Lay all the blame you want. But leave history out of it. No one today is responsible for what happened in the past, which is immutable.

Pick another reason to argue. This point is ridiculous.

You can say, "If only..." all day long, but you won't change anything.

"following international laws of peace as they were agreed upon by our governments."

This statement is of course a reference to the legality of this war which we've just won. It references the fact that shortly after Iraq accepted the terms of the ceasefire in '91, it unequivocably broke that ceasefire by firing on coalition aircraft patrolling the agreed upon no-fly zone. The "legality" of this war has been a non-issue for 12 years.

And he certainly knew what he was talking about.
Even he was scared for the people.
JFK tried, but he got in the way.
Many people got in the way.
Now we're here.
Wecome.

A thread with political science taught and explained by Bush Admirer, Simple Simon and daveman. Could it possibly be that a few of those "fuck you" signs were well deserved? What you three know and understand about political science, if written on paper, would not fill one side of a piece as big as the back of a standard matchbook cover.

If ignorance be bliss, then the three of you should be fucking hysterical. If Fresca and Eric were thrown into the mix, then we certainly would find most likely and IMO five of the most politically unaware and naive persons I have ever encountered. The five of you are closed minded and exemplify what happens to those who never explore or question. I usually have merely just laughed at your posts, posted nothing in reply because you would not appreciate or understand and just moved along.

However, I can see why those who wish to discuss and who are constantly subjected to your bilge, well, I can see where they would resort to basics with the likes of you.

The translation for this page when reduced to basic terms is: FUCK YOU. You make me embarrassed to be an American. You are sheep --- non-thinking, government-ass-kissing, foolish apologists for any action this nation may wish to take. You have been sucked in by the corporate agenda feed to you in the guise of "patriotism."

So sorry that you are offended by the replies you get. Have you considered how offensive many of your post are? Perhaps you should consider this. Hmmmm???

"So sorry that you are offended by the replies you get. Have you considered how offensive many of your post are? Perhaps you should consider this. Hmmmm???"

If that's what you need to believe, god love ya. I think I speak for all those who haven'y lapsed into you fantastical madness of denial when I say that we are hardly offended. Amused and saddened at times but hardly offended. carry on my good sir.

..."The Imperial States of America".

For all their Sophistry you will never see Psymon or Frescass quote the Founding Fathers in their Apologias for the Devil. They can't. The historical record is really quite clear on the matter. The Founding Fathers were well aware of the dangers of an Imperial State and set out speicifically to try and prevent such from arising.

Madison in particular was an opponent of standing Armies and agressive wars seeing in them the seeds of tyranny. He was right.

Might does not make right. It merely means you have the power to enforce your will upon threat of death. Because most of our Fighting Men are at heart good men does not mean the "Men" sending them in harm's way are.

And Psymon as always sings praises of the Plutocratic System we now have while ignoring that the engenuity and drive which got us here was by Free People pursuing their dreams - whether it be knowledge, wealth or independence. It was not brought about by the Fortune 500. Rather the Fortune 500 was brought about by the produce of the generations before. Turning a blind eye to the evils wrought by small men in large towers is not the act of a responsible citizen. It is the act of a Sheep.

The inroads made on our freedoms by the current Junta are an affront to the Men who made of it their Life's Work to give us a Free Land. They should be resisted at every opportunity.

...PoliSci Major.

Because we don't buy the rhetoric of the left we're "sheep --- non-thinking, government-ass-kissing, foolish apologists for any action this nation may wish to take"? Nice. I suppose if we spent all day crapping and puking on the street while holding up pictures of Bush with swastikas all over him, you'd think we were real swell.

But, no, since we disagree with you, we are "closed minded and exemplify what happens to those who never explore or question". Very politically-correct and sensitive of you. You just go on feeling all superior if you like; whatever gets you through the day, Skippy.

You know, and I know this will hurt your feelings, I don't log on here wondering if you're going to like what I have to say. I've tried engaging in rational debate, but most people in here are just too rabid to listen. So, I just say what I want and have a good time. I'm not offended by what I read; on the contrary, most of what I read is laughable. Thanks for the cheap entertainment!

Perhaps if the title of this thread were "Bush is a Nazi" you wouldn't think it was such a waste.

Oh, and Diogenes, this constant reference to Imperailism: It's a big word and all, and really impressive, but you haven't come anywhere near making the case for it. Maybe you should pick a smaller word first?

...is incapable of reasoned discourse. Although he does a good job of displaying is kneejerk anti-intellectual credentials.

Look up the definition of "imperialism" moron. The actions of the U.S. Federal Government under your beloved Fuhrer are just those one would expect from the Neo-Fascist wing of the Republikan elites.

The most amusing thing to me when I contemplate unthinking Brown Shirts like yourself is that when Hitler was done using the Brown Shirts he had them liquidated.

Remember the White Rose.

...uh, Diogenes, you spelled "republican" wrong.

Sorry if I embarrassed you.

They just pretend to be clueless assholes.
They work this site to create chaos.
It’s their job.

...can no more embarass me than Pee Wee Herman can. Probably less. Pee Wee for all his failings at least has wit.

Remember the White Rose.

You are so full of yourself! You're hilarious!

Who has the bigger ego, you or your hero Arnett? Or is it as big as...dare I say it...Geraldo's moustache?

...I am just shattered by your blind wit.

My ego is cosmic
I am dog.

what about the known terrorists we harbor? Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch masterminded the bombing of a Cuban passenger airliner that killed 73 people in 1987. Bosch was protected from extradition by the US government, then convicted of carrying out a bazooka attack on a ship in Miami harbor, after which the first President Bush signed an executive pardon for him and granted him safe haven in Florida. Think we should bomb Florida next?
For the record, I get my news from several different sources, domestic and foreign. Every news source has a bias, if you listen to just one and think you're getting pure truth you're lying to yourself.
And once again I have to reiterate- just because I am against this war does not mean I am for Saddam. I'm not suggesting he stay in power and we leave the Iraqi people alone to sort things out. I just think crushing the entire country because we can isn't the best way to go about liberating a people. For one thing, supporting anti-Saddam pro-democracy forces, like the Kurds, within the country would have been great. Trying Saddam for his crimes against humanity in the Haig or coercive inpections with military presence as opposed to full-scale war are all other possible options.
Also glad to see that more coherent individuals are posting on this topic, from either side. I didn't address everything in the responses to my post here, just the ones I felt like stressing at the moment. Doesn't mean I'm folding though.
Oh, and the thing about evil corporations and stuff, the point I was making is that the military is in Colombia and many of other nations that we are not and have never been at war with for the express purpose of "protecting American interests" which can be almost directly translated as American businesses whose interests are the resources of that nation. How'd our oil get under their country and all that. I use the phrase American businesses loosely, since many of the largest ones are organized in such a way that they do not have to pay US taxes.