THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume V, Issue # 73, March 19, 2003
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE U.S.A. & THE IRAQI THREAT: WHY NOT WAR?
By Paul Walfield
The reasons to not wage war against tyrants and dictators, who trample on the rights and bodies of their own people, are liked more than facing and fighting tyrannical and dicta- torial regimes. Tyrannical dictator Saddam Hussein is seeking and acquiring weapons that will allow him to continue his despotic rule over Iraq and expand his tyranny to other nations, yet, he is given the benefit of the doubt by those who see Conservative or Re- publican rule in the U.S.A. as an evil that needs their attention, rather than the actual evil that exists in Iraq.
United Nations resolutions, starting back in 1991 and calling for the disarmament of Saddam Hussein, are far more important than the actual disarming of his regime and depriving it of weapons of mass destruction. Saddam, in a speech this week, admitted having chemical and biological weapons 10 years ago and, while 12 years of weapons inspections by the United Nations have never been able to confirm it, Saddam says Iraq doesn't have them anymore. People on the political Left believe him.
Or, if they believe he still has them, or is still developing and acquiring them, members of the political Left would rather believe that "weapons inspections work," despite the fact that inspections have not, in twelve years, disarmed Saddam or prevented him from con- tinuing his weapons development and acquisition.
Why would anyone who is aware of Saddam's record of "achievements" over the years want him to stay in power? Well, they say they don't, not really, they just don't think taking him out is worth the risk to their lifestyle. After all, he hasn't invaded another country for over twelve years now.
Seriously, Saddam, while he may be behind a few terrorist attacks here and there, cer- tainly doesn't have an invading army poised to rape and pillage the way the Iraqi soldiers did in Kuwait in 1991. Of course, we shouldn't count the thousands upon thousands of his own people he has tortured and murdered in the last twelve years. We really need to ignore his poisoning of swamps in southern Iraq to wipeout whole populations of Shias living there; it is just none of our business.
Isn't it just an internal problem for the people of Iraq to solve? I mean it is one thing to step across a border and kill a few thousand people; the Iraqis, we all agree, need to be stopped from doing that. But, if they murder thousands of their own, tsk tsk, we are not our brothers' keeper are we? It is only when they kill a whole lot of us, our kind, our real brothers, that intervention may be warranted, right?
Then again, there are many, at least on the political Left, that believe we need to treat as ordinary criminal acts those acts which used to be, at least a couple of years ago, consid- ered casus belli (reason for war). After all, if we need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to send someone to prison, surely we need at least that amount of proof to go to war. Then again, we should not actually go to war, as it is just too messy. We need to, at least, have an international warrant drawn up and have the evil tyrants arrested and brought to justice.
Of course, you will never actually get a consensus of world opinion on who needs to be brought to justice and, even if you did, who would serve the warrant? What happens if they (the bad guys) refuse to be arrested? You are back to threatening war, which, of course, you won't engage in because it is too messy.
Then again, what is a casus belli? We all must agree that using airliners to blow up our buildings and murder our citizens is an act of war, right? What about simply murdering thousands, or millions of other people, folks who aren't American? Assuming the answer is no, how about the political regime of a foreign state that does that very thing, has weapons of mass destruction, and hates America? Not good enough, huh? How about if the regime sponsors terrorism, also? Not yet, huh?
Well, how about if the regime does all that and the leader of the terrorists who did attack America says he is in the fight on the side the Iraqi people also, but lacks a few supplies. Would that do it?
Ok, let's say the regime does all of the above, and it went to war against America and the world in 1991, and signed an agreement stopping that war--an agreement which it never lived up to. Would that be enough? How about if we add UN resolution 1441, which was agreed to by the world unanimously and says that Iraq is in material breach of the 1991 cease-fire and that, if Saddam Hussein's regime doesn't comply "immediately," he and his henchmen are toast? Does that do it?
Fortunately for those on the Left who subscribe to a negative response to any and all of the above, reality and practicality will not change their minds. After all, isn't the war with Iraq only about oil, and heaven knows no blood for oil, right?
Geopolitically speaking, why would it be in the best interest of the United States, or the world for that matter, to intervene militarily to disarm and remove a tyrant from power? For those on the political Left, it doesn't. For the rest of us, it does. All any of us who disagree with the Left need to be convinced otherwise is for someone in the "peace" movement to explain how keeping Saddam in power, promotes peace.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Liberals, Statists, Socialists, & Other Leftists
The Middle East & the Problem of Iraq
Page Two
Page One
The Problem of Rogue States:
Iraq as a Case History
The Middle East & the Arabs
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Paul Walfield is a freelance writer and member of the State Bar of California, with an undergraduate degree in Psychology
and post-graduate study in behavioral and analytical psychology. He resided for a number of years in the small town of
Houlton, Maine, and is now a California attorney. His articles appear in numerous periodicals and on numerous websites. He
has been the featured guest on KTSA News Talk Radio. CONTACT INFORMATION: Email:
paul.walfield@cox.net
Return to Top of Page
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE,
Volume V, 2003
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity