Thoughts on the war
The war on Iraq seems to be a popular topic as of late, and for the sake of argument, I just thought I'd throw my own personal take on things up here and allow other people to agree or disagree with me.
Let me start by saying that I would prefer if a diplomatic solution could have been reached. I would much rather have prefered a solution that prevented the loss of life on both the US/UK side and the Iraqi side. I don't want _anybody_ to die. I think the George Bush gave Saddam a chance to avoid bloodshed. He told Saddam that if he (and his sons) left the country, then war could be avoided. Many countries offered Saddam and his sons Asylum to prevent bloodshed. Saddam did not leave Iraq. I can think of 2 interpretations of this act off of the top of my head.
1) Saddam feels that the pride of the Iraqi people shouldn't be thrown away to the "Imperialist scum" that the US represents and didn't leave Iraq because he felt that we (the US) would corrupt his people.
2) Saddam doesn't care about his people and won't give up his power to protect them from harm.
I am inclined to believe that the reason Saddam didn't leave is #2. He has waged war on his own people. He has murdered and tortured Iraqi citizens. He had soldiers execute civilians who were trying to flee Baghdad. This to me does not indicate the actions of a leader who cares about his people. If he cared about them, why would he wish them harm. He method of persuasion isn't "fight for Iraq, your home". It's "fight for Iraq, or I'll have you killed". He hides soldiers and weapons in hospitals. He has soldiers use civilians as human shields. We don't want to hurt or kill any civilians. Why are they forcibly put in harm's way by Saddam? I can't think of an answer that makes me think of Saddam as an Iraqi Patriot and not as a Malicious Dictator. If you can, please, feel free to enlighten me.
I don't think that giving Saddam and the weapons inspectors more time would have worked. Saddam had 12 years. He had 12 years to satisfy the world. He failed. I am sure people are sick of comparing Saddam to Hitler, but I am going to do it anyways. A policy of appeasement was adopted to deal with Hitler. Diplomacy only made him believe that no one could stop him. Can the world take the chance to appease Saddam? Hitler didn't have chemical and nuclear weapons. I think Saddam does. What if he decides to use them? I am not willing to take that chance.
My thoughts and prayers go out to the soldiers from around the world that are fighting for freedom.
Let me start by saying that I would prefer if a diplomatic solution could have been reached. I would much rather have prefered a solution that prevented the loss of life on both the US/UK side and the Iraqi side. I don't want _anybody_ to die. I think the George Bush gave Saddam a chance to avoid bloodshed. He told Saddam that if he (and his sons) left the country, then war could be avoided. Many countries offered Saddam and his sons Asylum to prevent bloodshed. Saddam did not leave Iraq. I can think of 2 interpretations of this act off of the top of my head.
1) Saddam feels that the pride of the Iraqi people shouldn't be thrown away to the "Imperialist scum" that the US represents and didn't leave Iraq because he felt that we (the US) would corrupt his people.
2) Saddam doesn't care about his people and won't give up his power to protect them from harm.
I am inclined to believe that the reason Saddam didn't leave is #2. He has waged war on his own people. He has murdered and tortured Iraqi citizens. He had soldiers execute civilians who were trying to flee Baghdad. This to me does not indicate the actions of a leader who cares about his people. If he cared about them, why would he wish them harm. He method of persuasion isn't "fight for Iraq, your home". It's "fight for Iraq, or I'll have you killed". He hides soldiers and weapons in hospitals. He has soldiers use civilians as human shields. We don't want to hurt or kill any civilians. Why are they forcibly put in harm's way by Saddam? I can't think of an answer that makes me think of Saddam as an Iraqi Patriot and not as a Malicious Dictator. If you can, please, feel free to enlighten me.
I don't think that giving Saddam and the weapons inspectors more time would have worked. Saddam had 12 years. He had 12 years to satisfy the world. He failed. I am sure people are sick of comparing Saddam to Hitler, but I am going to do it anyways. A policy of appeasement was adopted to deal with Hitler. Diplomacy only made him believe that no one could stop him. Can the world take the chance to appease Saddam? Hitler didn't have chemical and nuclear weapons. I think Saddam does. What if he decides to use them? I am not willing to take that chance.
My thoughts and prayers go out to the soldiers from around the world that are fighting for freedom.