The Iraq War

Thank you for your argument, sir. Now, before I begin rebuttals and my closing , I would like to form several contentions, each with sources backing them up, that sum up my position for intervening in Iraq. CIVILIAN CASUALTIES 1. US Soldiers killed between 50-176000 civilians during the course of the 10 year war. (1) 2. Saddam Hussein, over 23 years of rule, is responsible for a at least 1.1 million deaths, not counting starvation and plague and other similar factor. (2) 3. Therefore, leaving Saddam in power would have cost many more lives than the war did. (1). . http://www.fair.org... (2). . http://wais.stanford.edu... WMD's 1. Saddam Hussein purchased chemical and biological weapons from North Korea, and requested nuclear technology. (1) 2. North Korea currently has nuclear technology and weapons. (2) 3. Therefore, leaving Saddam in power would almost certainly result in the ascertainment of nuclear weapons by Iraq. (1). . http://www.wnd.com... (2). . http://en.wikipedia.org... LEGALITY OF INVASION 1. There are four possible methods by which a country can surrender its sovereignty (1) 2. Iraq met all four of these standards, despite only needing to meet one. (2) 3. Therefore, Iraq lost its sovereignty, making an invasion legal. (1). . http://wiki.answers.com... (2). . http://www.monitor.net... Now, as last round, the quotes I found especially grievous. "As I stated, I do not need you to convince me that life was horrible under the Ba'ath regime" I simply can't emphasize enough how horrible, how despicably disgusting this man is. Our brains have lessened the impacts of words like genocide and rape and mass graves, so I do have to be far more specific to get my point across. "I know and understand that Saddam Hussein was a scourge upon humanity, and is personally responsible for the deaths of thousands. " Correction. Millions. "By your logic, I can safely assume that you think America is responsible for every atrocity in the world. I find that very inaccurate. That's like saying that you yourself are responsible for every murder in your city because you could have been patrolling the streets and slums, potentially preventing and avenging murder, and because you don"t do this, you are responsible for every murder that happens. " You should feel responsible if your the police chief. A good analogy, but not quite accurate. "By your logic we should currently be fighting dozens of these wars in North Korea, Iran, etc. in the name of human rights and WMD"s. " Not North Korea or Iran. Too powerful. However, when I join the army I would happily go and fight human trafficking and the horrors of warlords in Africa, or the oppressions of the former Soviet Bloc. I have not pro-war, but I am willing to take a reasonable analysis of potential conflicts, and when the pros far outweigh the cons, yes, I do support military intervention. "Since we waged war in Iraq, we ARE DIRECTLY responsible for thousands of deaths. " Look, I understand it is unreasonable to say we are responsible for the deaths in war-torn countries in, for example, Africa. But you cannot say we are directly responsible for deaths, when, if we had not intervened, far more would have been killed. "Our tax dollars financed the deaths of countless Iraqi citizens. " That's just not true. The tax dollars went to saving lives, and as I say over and over, lives were saved. Please at least be intellectually honest and confess this point. Now, on to rebuttals. POST WAR RAMIFICATIONS My opponent describes the poor state that Iraq is currently in, with many still dying of terrorists and starvation. (Far more than while we remained in occupation, by the way). And while my opponent wishes me not to go on any more about the horros of Hussein, he keeps making points that must be countered with them. 1. How many people are raped, and then executed for being raped in Iraq today? 2. How many people are executed for owning satellite dishes? 3. How many are executed for writing the wrong sentence in a paper? 4. How many chemical weapons are being deployed? 5. Does the current government still condone the throwing of acid on unveiled womens' faces? 6. How many brutal wars and invasions have the new government initiated? 7. How many millions have died as a direct result of their policies? 8. How many nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons are they now purchasing from North Korea? I could go on to about the two hundred mark. The horrors were worse than North Korea, or Africa, or China. And the death of the man responsible is the greatest victory of this decade. (He was executed in 2003, technically still this decade. ) A SUMMATION OF POINTS -Lives were saved, and the people of Iraq are infinitely better off. I challenge my opponent to deny this. My opponent says by this standard any nation deemed evil must be invaded. The reasons this is not true are: 1. Iraq, unlike other tyrannical countries, could be dismantled with quite low casualties. 2. Iraq posed a direct threat to US interests such as oil, and of course security. 3. Iraq invaded a sovereign nation, a direct threat to the world, and is the most important rule to uphold of the four required for a sate to surrender its sovereignty. I challenge my opponent to find countries with similar situations that conform to these reasons. -Iraq would continue to purchase and use chemical, biological, and very likely nuclear weapons from North Korea. I challenge my opponent to deny this as well. DO THE ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS Absolutely. Lives saved, everyone in Iraq is better off, and more chemical, biological, and possible chemical weapons disasters averted. Also, US and Iraqi security was protected, as well as the interests of human rights and oil in Saudi Arabia. So far, things are going well enough in Iraq, and for possibly the worst dictator in history to rule a country for 20 years, the way things are progressing is a fantastic feat. My opponent's last sentence in his previous argument is "We have yet to see what true effect American interventionism will have. " I consider that, and I believe you will as well, readers, a very important admission. "Things might get worse" is not an argument. Lives saved, a free population, and the world's greatest modern threat eliminated, the Iraq war is truly a victory for justice and peace, and I hope it will be remembers for the triumph it was. That is my case. Thank you for debating this with me, Sir.