If your browser doesn't automatically take you to The Cody Blog within a few seconds, please click here.
The Cody Blog: The Iraq War: Right, Wrong, and Rights

Sunday, June 26, 2005

The Iraq War: Right, Wrong, and Rights

I've been commenting in recent Cody News about how I think the US is going to have start some sort of new initiative to counter the ever-escalating degree and number of attacks against our troops, and especially the terrorist attacks against the Iraqi people.

I've found some of the comments from readers regarding those posts rather shocking, as it seems some people think that any acknowledgement of the horrid problems that we're now facing in Iraq somehow equates to being against the Iraq war in principle.

To be clear, I'm not overly opposed to the concept of us having gone in and getting rid of that horrible, racist, genocide-perpetrating dictator who was running what was a hellhole of a nightmare place on this planet. From a broader perspective, of course, there's the question of whether the US should ever use military force against a country that's not a direct threat, and it certainly does appear that Iraq was not a direct threat to the US.

That said, the US needed to go into the Middle East and shake things up. The horrible, violent, vicious dictatorships there (including Saudi Arabia, Iran, and every single non-democratic/non-capitalist government in the area -- all dictatorships are violent and vicious by definition, as it takes the threat (or use) of guns against the citizenship to maintain power in a dictatorship) have been able to stay in -- and increase -- their power because of their huge oil reserves (which should belong to individuals and not governments). Those dictatorships' nations are a breeding ground for hate and anger, and not just against the US, but against all society, including their own governments. Clearly, as the US learned on 9/11, that hatred can carry beyond their own borders and onto US soil.

Rather than simply judging this Iraq war on the merits of whether or not our own administration mislead us (certainly there is evidence, though not conclusive, of this, along with as cited in this article, of utter cluelessness), or whether we've got enough troops and security in the country yet (which we clearly do not, given the horrendous escalation of violence there), the ultimate judging will come in another ten or twenty years. Certainly, given the fact that we've not had another major terrorist attack in this country since 9/11, our government has done something right, at least here in the near term. And certainly, the Iraqi people have the opportunity to have a better life (heck a right to life at all) now that the mass murderer who used to terrorize their every minute and movement is gone. However, that doesn't mean it will ultimately turn out to be a better life for them. Just that the opportunity now exists where it didn't previously.

But the US is going to have to do something different and do it soon to combat the escalating underground violence now taking place in Iraq.

Nothing's ever easy. And there's a hell of a lot at stake here, there and everywhere.


Blogger jason said...

Cody Im sorry but how do you judge the merits of the iraq war, if not for the reasons for entering the war. President bush promised, promised nuclear and chemical weopens. None were found. Now the President bush and his people claim the right to start a war, is over freedom and overthrowing tyrants. over 1600 died so far on that promise. Ok you can say there are alot of dictarships in the world. Ok why not overthrow every one of them. Why not Korea? They definately have nukes and chemical weopens, they admited it. Why not go to Sudan, there are over 5Million africans starving and dying to death because of the sudanese dictartorship. Wait no, we wont bring them freedom because Korea will definately kick back, and who cares about a bunch of africans, they dont even have any oil. If President Bush really wanted to make a dent in terriosm he would have knocked off Korea or put a krimp on the russians, or even the chinese. If you ever realize, the weopens the insurgents use against americans are korean, russian, and chinese made ak-47's :D.

6/26/2005 07:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Eli said...

Seems to me that many wars that have been waged throughout history, have in fact begun over certain issues only to find that more important issues were addressed at its conclusion.

For instance, a US-friendly government in the Middle East may save thousands upon thousands of lives when the day comes that we must engage China. Recent news shows that that day may not be as far off as once thought. In fact, I believe it to be inevitable.

So, yes, 1700+ have made the ultimate sacrifice for a war you may disagree with due to the absence of WMDs, but ultimately they may have sacrificed their lives to give us a strategic advantage should war with China occur thereby saving thousands upon thousands of lives, or better yet provide reason to avoid conflict all together.

6/26/2005 10:08:00 PM  
Blogger ray g said...

Cody-your statement that we have not had another terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11 is all you need to say-the war has been successful in my mind. The reason we are there is to exercise influence over the surrounding countries aiding and assisting the terrorists, ie Al Quada, so far so good. But you're right, we need more troops over there.

6/27/2005 03:44:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you guys never thought why 9/11 happened ?? does only the usa have the patent for "aggression" ?? when you are doing it it's right when others it's terrorism ?? pay a little attention for what is going on outside your "glourious" empire

6/29/2005 08:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll agree with many of Jason's points, but ray g's main point is all there is. Al-Qaeda is focusing more and more of their time and resources trying to fight off our superior military in their land, not ours.

6/29/2005 09:42:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home