Another Response

Response to a few points: Annon posted 10:13 PM on October 4th in the Fairness thread.

Iraq Liberation act of 1998 passed US Senate unanimously. Getting rid of Saddam is hardly a new idea. After 9/11 we simply decided to actually do it. If a Senator didn't really want Saddam to be deposed then perhaps they shouldn't have voted for this? I know, it is all different now. Bush actually means what he says.

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. If you don't want the President to go hunting, don't hand him a hunting license. The idea that someone would vote for this only to allow the US to bluff doesn't pass the giggle test let alone the statesman test.

The poster notes that other nations have committed atrocities but "the US sat it out because there was no interest threatened."

And your point is? The police can't stop every crime so they should stop none? Or is this a claim that our interests weren't threatened in Iraq? If so I again direct your attention to the two American laws detailing the charge passed signed by two different presidents.

Kosovo? European stability is not something we are going to toy widened sit out. We flew 62% of the sorties? What other country had the military might to do that?

European stability wasn't threatened if they acted. And if they won't act, or can't, that is an incredible indictment of them is it not? And of course if no other country could handle Kosovo what makes you think any other country would be able to help much in Iraq, a vastly more difficult enterprise?

To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,

Which the supporters of the Iraq war have not done.

Just because we question the motivation and reasoning behind this war does not mean we are unpatriotic. It does not mean we hate America.

Problem is: some people are criticizing it for exactly those reasons. There are legitimate points where reasonable people might disagree on the strategy and wisdom behind Iraq. Problem is, they are rarely (if ever) made by the anti-War left. Such criticism is usually confined to segments of the American right.

It does NOT mean we love Saddam or bin Laden.

No, but some of your fellow travelers view any enemy of America as a friend.

Since this ruthless dictator wasn't linked to 9/11 or global terrorism,how does this relate to protecting us against terrorism?

He was linked to terrorism and there are certainly some tenuous links to the first WTC bombing. He had a violent hatred for the United States, an incredible desire for revenge, and a history of making disastrous miscalculations and aggressions beyond his borders.

His removal eliminated a strategic threat to American interests. It allowed us to remove ourselves from Saudi Arabia. It provided a platform for a frontal assault on the Islamic Fascist movement. It is one thing to rejoice when infidels in New York die. It is quite another when the infidel sends forces half way around the globe to hunt down and kill the people who would rejoice.

Fighting in Iraq shatters their world view. It places the battles in their homes, and those who fight us there face well armed American forces. It gives those who might otherwise cheer with pride the losses of the infidels (justifiable) cause to fear they might be next.

You think Libya gave up its efforts because they decided to be nice?

The thing about fighting wars successfully is it makes the enemy mad and they will try to hurt you. But it isn't like they were missing reasons before. Unless you are advocating pre-emptive surrender (and yes, I think that is essentially Kerry's position though he says something else) the only way to prevail is to take the fight to the enemy.

The enemy isn't bin Laden's network. That is like viewing the enemy after Dec 7th to be Admiral Yamamato rather than the Empire of Japan.

Taking out the existing cadre (75% of bin Laden's top network) is exceptionally valuable even if they manage to fill in some people. The new people aren't likely to be as good, and as we take them out recruiting will gradually become harder. Dreaming of world conquest is so much nicer when the infidel isn't hunting you.

You seem to have some of your statistics wrong. America is the number one contributor of foreign aid ($13.3B of $58.3B). In freedom, the US is one of 39 countries (and by far the largest) with the highest ranking in political and civil rights. In economic freedom I have a 2004 dataset (2002 data) which shows the US in a 4 way tie for third place after Hong Kong and Singapore. I'll give you literacy and life expectancy. As for education it depends on what level of education.

Look; trying to play defense against Islamic Fascism is a guarantee of defeat. You could spend a trillion dollars on Homeland Security and not be safe. The only effective defense is a really good offense.

And taking the fight to Saddam was an essential part of that offense. Making them love us is impossible. We need their respect and in their society we obtain it through their fear of us. Instead of people prattling about "Why do they hate us" we need the people in their society to start worrying about why we hate them. Let them worry about how to soothe our anger and rage.

To get a start on understating why I view things that way, start with Bernard Lewis's The Roots of Muslim Rage.

Peace through superior firepower.