It’s all too easy to jump on the far-left bandwagon of loathing America’s actions. To support the war is an unpopular idea. War is bad. Death is bad. It is a drain to our economy and nationalism. Who are we to spread democracy?
Yet, as sure as I am of the major ramifications of publicly admitting this, I support the war in Iraq. I think terrorism is a very real problem, a clear and present danger, and one we must protect ourselves from. I think the imposition of democracy is necessary because our ideology, while not infallible, realizes the need for equality and recognizes the immorality of a murderous and aggressive military dictatorship.
When our president decided to remove Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party from power, he did so based on information that they possessed chemical, biological and nuclear missile programs. This idea wasn’t ridiculous, because such weapons had been previously used in suppressing the Kurds and fighting the Iranians. This actually had been the general consensus that such a situation existed or threatened to exist before Bush took office. This is made clear in statements from, among others, officials in the Clinton administration, including his national security advisor and secretary of state. Even John Kerry, in 2002, stated his belief that Saddam had a “deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.”
To suggest that Bush not only deliberately lied, but somehow managed to trick these officials along with various other persons in high office, besides what it says about President Bush and his motives, assumes an extremely low level of intelligence and a high level of gullibility for many in high office. In an interview with Jon Stewart, Kerry stated that “you don’t go to war because you want to, you go to war because you have to.” It sounds like a noble idea, as it certainly received a large applause from the Daily Show audience, but what Kerry fails to realize is that when you don’t go to war until you have to, it’s too late; the cost will be many times greater.
Iraq was a threat to our security. Had Saddam’s regime not been overthrown, he would still be using his wealth to support terrorism. He would remain free to abuse his own people. He would have attempted to subvert our allies in the Arabian Peninsula. Our influence and security in the region and the world would certainly have been precarious.
It is true that the war has been mismanaged and mistakes have been made, but this isn’t unusual. In every such conflict every nation’s military and civilian leaders have made costly mistakes. However, to abandon the effort would be folly because we must accomplish something, and it is too late to turn back. It may be unfortunate, but the United States has taken on the role of global police, and the main target of those who aim to destroy our country and its people. The situation in Europe during the 1930s, when Nazi Germany was allowed to violate treaties and gain power, is clearly indicative of what results from avoiding war at all costs. Surely, we can look the other way, but sooner or later, the situation must be confronted. The longer we wait, the greater the cost.
[email protected]