Good points and questions, Isaac, I'll try to answer one by one.
First off thanks Jim for omitting me of your hit list. It's always good to know that I won't get whacked while I sleep
I give credit where it is due, and criticism as well. You've done nothing, nor ignored anything, that would result in criticism.
Secondly, I too hate when liberals (or any person for that matter) cower as soon as something that is such obvious good news (ie. the capture of Saddam). Anyone with half a brain should be happy when a truly dispicable person is found and is about to be brought to justice. It was no different than Pol Pot, Milosevic and yes, even Hitler (though his fate was more left to providence than justice) However, that can also go both ways (examples which I could go into, but that would be better left for another thread, another times).
I just find it odd when some are so eager to jump on the bash Bush bandwagon, and bash USA bandwagon - that they don't seem nearly as eager to speak out agains those considered our enemies. It's then that I realize their true purpose for being here.
However, my main thesis in defense of intellectual liberalism on the war in iraq, is whether the end justifies the means? Frankly I think that is a fair question.
As do I. You'll get varying opinions here from both ends of the spectrum. I think human lives are being saved, therefore that alone justifies the entire war. Nothing short of invasion and removing Saddam was going to accomplish that.
When do we have the right the decide what government is best for Iraq? Has the war truly ended (perhaps it would be better to say reduced) the WMD threat in the middle east? Do the loss of lives both innocent and guilty justify freedom? Has this war dented terrorism or fanned the flames of fundamentalism? Has the war shown the US and its coalition to be agents of freedom or deliquents of international law? Has the US grown friendships or polarized its former allies.
I only think we have the right to help with an interim government, after that the rest should be wholly decided by Iraq through the voting process. I hope their on their way, but only time will tell.
The primary 'war' in Iraq is over. Their will unfortunately be deaths to ensue due to insurgents, but that's to be expected. I don't think the 'war' with terrorism in the Middle East is over, nor the threat of WMD. We won't see that for quite some time, but it's been a good start over the last year.
The lives lost is sad. This, I believe, is sometimes a necessary evil. Lives have been lost on the battlefield many times over the years in the name of freedom, and I'm sure this won't be the last time. It's for some the ultimate sacrifice to give, one that we all benefit from.
I think terrorism has been dented AND flames have been fanned. I would say it's sort of like the eye of the storm. I think we would all agree that terrorism needs to go. The removal process has to start somewhere, why not start in a country that is being slaughtered by it's own President.
I think many see the coalition as delinquents, but I also think that will change over time. More people despise war than like it, so the negative backlash is nearly always expected. Results will win people over. It's yet to be seen whether or not the war on terror can be a full success but I think this has all been a damn good start.
I think the US has alienated allies to an extent AND some bonds have been made stronger. It will take time to mend the wounds with France, Russia, Germany & Canada - but it will heal.
I think the best question of all, is what right do we as global citizens (not just Americans, but all of us) have to imply our moral values on them.
I agree. I think we should help them get started with their own government, ensure the safety of their people, then get out of dodge.
I wish I had the time to address one of these individual points, but the idea is, is that there are many valid questions and I think most people can guess the answers "liberals" as you call them, would say to many of these questions. However, some might just surprise you.
I'm usually referring to the foaming at the mouth liberals that fail to see any good whatsoever coming out of war with Iraq. Their are negatives and positives alike. We work to make the negatives better from this point on, but we don't ignore the good.
P.S. On a side note, I've never understood the inherent rabid animosity between "conservatives" and "liberals". I find the divisions feed their way almost into to social fabric of your nation. Isn't it just okay to agree to disagree? Just an observation, not a judgement by any means.
Generally speaking, it usually does end up with agreements to disagree. Then you have some that are too conservative for some and then the foaming liberals I already mentioned. Politics has always been a sour subject and 9 out of 10 times leads to arguments and mudslinging. Entertaining at times, but not in the best interest of the country.
not to change subject but I hear on the news that democratic hopefuls are glad we got the bastard , as americans, but stated we went about it the wrong way. I wish I could see into the future and make my decisions now based on how things played out. mr.wizard, mr.wizard bring me home....
