AMERICAN viewpoints on the Iraq Crisis

Discussion in 'Politics' started by hapaboy, Jan 19, 2003.

  1. The purpose of this thread is for AMERICANS (US citizens) to debate the crisis over Iraq.

    Why am I only asking for AMERICAN viewpoints? The primary reason is to prevent the debate from deterioriating into international mud-slinging between a few individuals (myself included) as it has on Candle's "Poll: The repercussions of a US attack on Iraq" thread.

    There are those who will object to this thread being started and cry foul, that they are being denied freedom of expression based on their nationality. They mad add, quite rightly, that the Iraq crisis will affect non-Americans as well.

    Therefore, non-American ETers have every right to start another thread for non-American viewpoints or for ALL viewpoints, however they see fit. Or they may keep to Candle's thread. The point is they are not being denied a forum to express their opinions.

    I see it like this:

    America was attacked on 9/11, America is on the brink of war with Iraq, American troops are going to have to fight and die, and it is Americans like us who will, for better or worse, have to deal with the consequences in the immediate short-term. Why then is it wrong for Americans to have a debate among ourselves?

    Enforcement will be nigh impossible. The best we can ask for is that non-Americans respect the wishes of the participants of this thread and express themselves in another thread of their own creation and choosing.

    OK, having said all that, I'll start off by simply stating that I am in favor of removing Saddam from power. My reasoning is as follows:
    1) He hates us, AND
    2) He has shown a willingness to use weapons of mass destruction - on his own people no less, AND
    3) I believe he would not hesitate to handoff weapons of mass destruction to terrorists to use against the US, and we simply cannot give him the benefit of the doubt.

    Also, I find the concept of hoping to find a "smoking gun" in Iraq ridiculous, as he has had years to hide his inventory. A couple of hundred inspectors looking for something as small as a trace of biological evidence in a petrie dish in a country the size of Iraq is the proverbial needle-in-a-haystack scenario. Former inspectors have said as much on the various network news programs, like CNN. Regardless of UN approval, I think for our own security we need to remove Saddam. 9/11 should also signify the date Saddam's luck ran out.

    To those against taking action, my fundamental questions to you are: What should our country do to protect itself, and can we afford to give Saddam the benefit of the doubt that he will not produce or distribute weapons of mass destruction to terrorists?
  2. Foz


    We should do what it takes to protect ourselves and our allies. President Bush had it right that you are either against terrorism or for it. Appeasement leads to contempt and terrorist attacks.

    Saddam has been in continuous defiance of UN resolutions by shooting at and tracking our planes in the no-fly zone. He is an enemy of the people of the US and must be removed before he has the nuclear capability to act on it.

    Same for Kim Il Jong.

    No one will celebrate their removal as much as the Iraqi and N. Korean citizens. The Dow will jump 500 points and oil will drop $5 per barrel as soon as US troops roll into Baghdad. Let's roll!
  3. Foz, thanks for your post.

    Unfortunately, it is widely reported that Kim already has one or two nuclear devices. N. Korea is a vivid reminder precisely why we have to remove Saddam now.

    My sense is we will also have to take military action against N. Korea down the road as diplomacy doesn't seem to be working this time around, but it may yet prevail. But if we do hit Kim, it will be a far more costly endeavor than Iraq, I fear.
  4. Interesting article from Time regarding Arab leaders attempting to instigate a coup in Iraq.,8599,408784,00.html

    I just wonder about the makeup of the transitional government and whether or not such a transition would indeed solve the problem or result in a Hussein clone in power and another test of wills down the road.

    In any case, US determination to push forward appears to be putting major pressure on the Saudis, and deservedly so.
  5. AAAintheBeltway posed this question on another thread. I'm posting it here in the hopes that it will get further attention and elicit responses from other Americans.

  6. Rumsfeld and Rice are in the papers saying war may be averted if Saddam goes into exile.

    Saddam's inner circle must be in a frenzy right now, what with Arab leaders trying to initiate a coup and now this. Them trying to save their own skins just may lead to Saddam's ouster via a coup or exile.

    Wishful thinking?
  7. I think Saddam will wish he had when he sees all his palaces go up in smoke. The guy lives in bunkers, maybe he's worn out, but he's bought into his own fantasy.
  8. We should attack Iraq, if and only if, we have a good enough reason to do so, a reason that could be presented to all Americans, and upon a vote of the American people, the majority decision is to move forward. In lieu of a direct vote, the people should express their wishes to the political leaders through accurate and scientific polls, letters to the President and Congress, and other means.

    Should we be concerned with what the rest of the world thinks?

    Of course. Should world opinion stop us from doing what we believe is the right course of action?


    The moment our conscience is replaced by the opinions of other countries around the world, that is the precise moment we have lost our freedom.

    We need to act in a manner that supports what WE BELIEVE is right, not what others think is right.

    Not to do so, not to follow our own sense of what is right, to cower and act according to the wishes of others when they have their own confused political agendas, would be to lose touch with what has made America great, and that is our spirit of our Independence. We must act from the strength of knowing our actions are according to what we believe is right, and not out of fear of the consequences of what others may believe. We have to be true to ourselves, and our own belief systems.

    If it is the right thing to do, do it, and if necessary declare our independence from the rest of the world on this be it, so help us God.


    The question should never be whether or not we do the right thing, but what indeed is the right thing to do. If we have to depend upon others telling us what the right thing to do is, we have regressed to just a colony of the world and world opinion, no longer acting as a sovereign, self governing United States of America.

    All that being said, Bush needs to make his case to Americans first, not the rest of the world. He needs to understand that he is an elected official, not above the will of the people or law of our land.

    WE THE PEOPLE......
  9. ElCubano


    1) not a reason to go to war. If we attacked everyone that hated us,, oh well.

    2) Many dictators kill their own people.......What do we do about them???

    3) This and only this may be a consideration......

  10. If nations do not take the lead in disarming tirants then the risk of a nazi-like scenario increases. I'm pleased America is leading this coalition.
    #10     Jan 21, 2003