Originally posted by plawrence:
After it was established that WMDs could not be found in Iraq, many people here justified the invasion of Iraq for one of the following reasons:
1- The country is/was a stronghold for terrorists.
2- The country presented a clear and present danger to the security of the United States.
3- Saadam Hussein was a brutal dictator who should have been removed anyway.
For the record, I've never used any of the above. My contention was because Hussein failed to comply with UN resolutions (the original reason stated by Bush for going in), we should go in. As I've said countless times, had Bush stuck with that reason, he wouldn't have gotten so ridiculed for the infamous WMDs (which, incidentally, Iraq had 12 years to hide, export, etc. anyway). Many cry about how the US needs to bow to the great UN. Well, when we originally went in, that's precisely what we were doing. They said something needed to be done. So, we do something and get blasted because we did. Even if the army hadn't found a firecracker, it would not have mattered because Hussein wasn't playing ball. If that's not "justification," then dismantle the UN and everybody turn their backs on that circus and go home. Otherwise, if you're going to make resolutions, rules, etc., then you
must put some teeth into it...or else you're just wasting everybody's time.
Also for the record, as I've said countless times (and Bro. Plaw has even stipulated!
), I say let's seal up our own borders and forget about being the World Police Force. We're kicked like dogs even when we're called upon by someone to help 'em out, so I say, let 'em fend for themselves and we'll do the same.
