Questions for the hawks and other war thoughts
Today there was both an explosion in Kabul that killed at least twenty-two and an attempt on Hamid Karzai’s life. Basically there was chaos in Kabul. It appears our job in Afghanistan is far from finished. I don’t think things will stabilize over there for some time, if ever.
Obviously we went into Afghanistan without much of an exit strategy, or whatever strategy we had is not working well. Of course that situation was much different than our impending war with Iraq. We were attacked and had to go in there to get the people who masterminded that attack. There was a sense of urgency that we had to do something quickly, or Al Qaeda would disperse, we had to punish the Taliban regime for harboring terrorists, etc. We didn’t really have time to do a lot of planning. Whether we succeeded or not is debatable, but that’s another post. My point is that the fact there was little post-engagement planning was understandable.
Iraq, however, is a much different issue. We have not been attacked. Yes, Saddam is a despot, but he hasn’t shown any recent aggression towards us. I agree that in the long run the world would be a better place if we didn’t have him to worry about. I still feel the question of whether or not he has WMD capability is not clear-cut, but the fact that he would probably be happy to get them is problematic. He is a bad person. Period.
But what’s the rush to attack him right now? It seems we are containing him. I have seen no concrete evidence to the contrary.
Why does it not make sense to pause the sabre-rattling for a while and plan? Perhaps come up with a solid exit strategy? Something like a Marshall Plan, for example.
Why does it not make sense for the president to go before the UN and demand that Iraq allow unfettered weapons inspections? It’s one thing say, “Oh they’ll never allow them anyway,” but it would be quite another if we asked for them formally and they refused. It would certainly go a long way to convincing the rest of the world action is necessary.
Why does it not make sense for the president to ask Congress for an actual declaration of war and not just a rubber-stamp resolution? After all we are talking about launching a pre-emptive (read “unprovoked”) attack on another country. We are not responding to a direct act of aggression from Saddam.
Why is the president past the point to take a step back and try to find a diplomatic solution as some pundits have stated?
Why is it necessary to create yet another area of instability in the Middle East? Why does it not make sense to wait until the situations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Israel are more stable? Not solved, just a little more stable.
Again I ask, why is there such a sense of urgency?
Anytime these questions are asked of the hawk brigade, we don’t get answers but rather pronouncements about nuclear capabilities, evil despots, and weapons of mass destruction. No evidence, just fire, brimstone, and impending doom at the hands of Saddam. I’m not saying there is no truth in any of the pro-war proselytizing. I would just like to see a little bit of evidence or a sign of some long-term thinking. I am not prepared to support this war on faith alone. I don’t think I am alone.
I am not concerned that we would not trounce an Iraqi army. I am not a Saddam sympathizer. I prefer peace, as I am sure most do, but I am not 100 percent anti-war. I just don’t understand all the hell-bent hawkishness.
I find it disturbing that only one half of the question about Iraq is being asked. The question should not be just “Should we invade Iraq?”. The question should be “Should we invade Iraq, and if we do invade Iraq, is this Administration up to the task of rebuilding Iraq?”.
Obviously, the Administration does not want the second part of the question asked, because then people would start looking at Afghanistan. Once they do that, the answer will almost certainly come back “No”.
Comment by kevin | 9/6/2002
May be just a bunch of nothing but I think the whole thing really behind the Iraq thing is three little letters: O I L. Bust their ass, set up a pupit government(Big Marshall plan), get a endless supply of cheap oil (for companies) at the expense of American lives and Lots of tax payers money.
Comment by Bob | 9/7/2002