The Iraq War

Your working for the Iraqi government, a low-paying desk job. One morning you come in, after brewing yourself a nice cup of decaf, and stumble on the way in to your office and spill some coffee on some papers bearing the party symbol. Oh, your sorry? Too late, the police are on the way. You have about five minutes to call your loved ones. But don't worry, they won't kill you just yet. First they round up your family, your friends, your acquaintances, anyone who meant anything to you. Then they torture them to death, using all horrible means they can, while you watch and clap and laugh and suggest new ways to add to their torment. After they are all dead, then a member of the party sentences you. And if you get sentenced to death, at least you go to the grave with the satisfaction that you got off with a light punishment. This was a crime punishable by death, and it seems I will have to be much more specific and personal to get my point across. Now, on to my response. I will begin by responding to unrelated quotes that I immediately took issue with: "As a side note, you declare that you follow Libertarian ideology, an ideology that is HEAVILY anti war and non Interventionist" Yes, about that. I just feel that people who fight so hard for freedom should care about other people's freedom, as well. "I find point particularly heinous, another country"s economic value to us is not an appropriate justification for war." I was under the impression that the Libertarian platform was only interventionist when US interests were involved. "I find it disgusting that you blame the Non-interventionist movement for the deaths in Rwanda and the rest of the world." It's unfortunate you find that disgusting. I find it disgusting that people with your opinion prevented an intervention that would save nearly a million lives. You justify it by using the old argument that the US is not a policeman for the world. Perhaps your right. Except who else will enforce international law, and prevent atrocity? The rest of the security council? It truly must be terrible to live in a place where your own government launches gas at you, only to have the country with the ability to prevent this travesty decline to do so because of people who stand for freedom. That's what I find disgusting. "You spend a good amount of your first entry bashing the Anti-War movement, rather than justifying the Iraq War" Yeah, one out of six sections. You spend almost half of your argument on that topic. Now on to rebuttals: SADDAM"S HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AS A JUSTIFICATION My opponent begins by condemning Saddam Hussein, good for him. He also points out the An'Anfal campaign that led to the deaths of 100,000 people, but says that it took place in 1980, and that this is not a justification. On this point, I would like to say that I did not specifically site this as a justification. That genocidal effort was horrible, but truly was the tip of the iceberg. Hundreds were executed every day in mass hangings, shootings, with their bodies thrown in shallow graves together. And you are willing to leave a man who committed genocide in power, because he hasn't done it again yet? As his religious fervor grow toward the end of his reign, (1) how long do you think it would be before a similar event took place, before the Christians, or the Shiites, were slaughtered? Next, my opponent points out that Iraq was one of several fundamentalist and fascistic states. While Iraq was almost decidedly the worst, I don't quite see how other states being equally horrible justifies Hussein's crimes. That is akin to saying that ending the holocaust is pointless, because America has internment camps as well. Also, the WMD's that did exist, if not in Iraq at that point, and the potential of an invasion of Saudi Arabia, does put Iraq within the US's interests. WMD's My opponent begins by stating that Iraq surrendered on its chemical and biological weapons program in 1991, after having used them both on Iran and on the Kurdish people. I do not dispute this. After all, who needs chemical and biological weapons when you can have nukes? Also, having used them before, and having a direct source for these weapons, why do you again believe Hussein is past or above this? If a war had ensued between Iraq and Saudi Arabia, do you honestly believe Hussein would use fair means and closely adhere to the rules of war? Next my opponent claims that North Korea, whose veracity in nuclear weapons is questionable, could almost certainly t have provided weapons to Iraq in 2001. Your right, and its a dang good thing we took them out then, isn't it? If we had not, Hussein would still be in power, and still be closely associated with North Korea. Also, North Korea almost certainly has biological, chemical, and nuclear capabilities at this point. (2) (3) POST-WAR RAMIFICATION My opponent reports the loss of civilian life, around 134,000 people, at the hands of the United States. Those civilians were innocent, and such a high number is a terrible thing. Wouldn't it be even worse if more were killed? You know where this is going. Here is a list of some of Hussein's offenses with casualty counts. 1. Civilian Executions- 600,000 deaths 2. Kurdish Ethnic Cleansing- 100,000 deaths 3. War with Iran- 500,000 deaths, mostly civilian (4) Saddam Hussein was in power around 8,000 days, and averaged 75-125 civilian deaths a day. (5) Imagine leaving that man in power up to today. Nearly ten times more civilians died as a result of Hussein then as a result of the US invasion. For this reason it is a triumphant day for human rights when we took him out. My opponent says the blood of those civilians is on the US's hands? Well, I shudder to think of the seas of blood that would drown him and his anti-war compatriots had they been listened to. As for the rapes and murders by US soldiers, they are terrible and sad and the soldiers responsible should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But, I reiterate, you want terrible, look no further then what those soldiers were firing at. Hundreds of rapes every day, with the raped facing punishments, if they were women. WHERE IS THE JUSTICE AND NOBILITY THAT YOU DECLARE THIS WAR HAD? Where is it? In the eyes of the millions of children that we saved from death and torture and fascism. In the faces of the mothers whose children's and families deaths were avenged and averted by the US. A man I would argue far worse then Hitler or Mao or Stalin is dead, and there is no greater justice than watching his limp body swing from that lonely tree in Baghdad. DID THE ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS? Yes. I challenge my opponent to deny that leaving Saddam in power would lead to far greater evils then were committed in the course of the war. Iraq is still unstable, but a new government is in place, a much more reasonable one, who in fact very recently turned on their old ally, North Korea, and raided a cargo ship containing weapons heading for Bashar Al-Assad. (6) Lives saved, a people freed, a monster of a human being dead, the Iraq war is truly one of the noblest conflicts in human history. (1) http://hollowverse.com... (2) http://en.wikipedia.org... (3) http://www.bloomberg.com... (4) http://en.wikipedia.org... (5) http://wais.stanford.edu... (6) http://articles.chicagotribune.com...