Free flowing of opinion about some of the issues

[question everything]

1. The War in Iraq. I supported the war. Not because of WDM – nothing was found; not because of links to Al Qaeda – nothing was proven. But because of the brutality by which Saddam and his sons ruled. I guess I do see the United States as the policeman of the world. No one else will. This is why I supported Kosovo and this is why I wished the U.S. intervened earlier during WWII. I have no doubt that had Hitle just “killed his Jews” and never invaded Poland and then got Japan as an ally – that this country would have not intervened. As we know, at first many here welcomed Hitler as a barrier to Communism

2. What now? I think that it is foolish to just fold back. I think that Iraq’s neighbors, other Arab nations who are culturally closer to Iraq, should be the ones to restore some order and a government. Not Western nations. In the movie the Fog of War MacNamara points out the need to understand what’s on the mind of one’s enemy. The Iraqi people have always felt betrayed by Western nations, starting with the end of the Ottoman empire. I think that as with WDM, we either had bad intelligence about the welcome by the Iraqi people or deliberately ignored it to take over the oil fields. I also think that it is up to the Iraqi people to decide what type of government they want, even a theocracy.

3. Jobs. Government cannot create jobs. The only exception was Roosevelt’s programs during the depression and they did not end it. I think by nature most Americans do not want a government to be too involved in these issues. But I think that we can limit the tax benefits that employers have from outsourcing. Employer can deduct wages and salaries from their gross revenue. We should limit the extent by which wages paid overseas can be deducted by using one of those convoluted algorithm that the IRS is so good at.

4. Health care. First, get the employers out of the equation. I think that about one third of compensation goes to “benefits.” I would rather have this money paid to me and let me worry about purchasing health coverage – when I am young and healthy. I don’t like my employer knowing about medical conditions of family members and I don’t need the often way too generous and expensive plan. I like to compare health coverage to education. All should have access to a basic one, but for those who want to purchase a more expensive one, they can go ahead. I would like, however, to have my premiums go to the actual providers, not to enrich the CEOs for increasing shareholders’ wealth by cutting on actual treatment. Ideally, health insurance should not be publicly traded, should not even be for profit. I know that many see access to health care as an important issue, but I don’t know who most of the voters feel about a universal plan.

[oostevo]

1. A bit of a moderate, then, aren't you?

I certainly see your point on the first argument (but, really, they were all excellently put). Really, I probably would have been much more supportive of the war if Bush had said, from the beginning, "Look. Saddam is a very bad person who has committed horrible atrocities, and for the good of the Iraqi people, we must remove him." I would probably have questioned the timing a bit, and thought twice about Bush's military contractor ties, but I would have been much more supportive nonetheless. Instead, Bush lied to us, repeatedly. And it looks like he lied because the invasion's cause was malicious/militant. I can't support that. But feel free to express your own 'free flowing' opinion.

I do, agree, though that we shouldn't just cut and run from Iraq (I don't know of anyone who supports doing that). We broke it, we bought it, and we ought to get international support in Iraq to help stabilize it, for the good of both ourselves and the Iraqi people.

[myopic4141]

2. I disagree

I could not support the war because I could not support preemptive war. Saddam was/is a bad guy; but, being a bad guy should not be a justification for going to war. The time of justification was after the invasion of Kuwait just as the time to go into the Balkans was after the atrocities had expanded into Albania and Mesopotamia. We did not remove him then and squandered that opportunity. Preemptive war requires an unattainable level of accuracy in intelligence, a level that even George Tenet said could never be reached. By lying to the American people and the world whether intentional or not, we have set the standard by which future countries can use war over diplomacy. The bar has been set very low; thus, made the world a more dangerous place. That is the legacy Bush has left this country for future generations. We no longer have the moral authority to deny anyone from using war as the first choice rather than the last.

[strategery blunder]

3. What about our complicity in Saddam's evilness?

I agree with you 150% that Saddam was a very evil person. But we sold him the same WMD's in the eighties that he used on the Kurds just a couple of years later...
:wtf:
...because we hated the mad mullahs in Iran. (But when Saddam started winning the war, we gave weapons to Iran) :wtf:
Shouldn't we share some responsibility here ?

[rman]

4. is removal of a dictator worth thousands of deaths?

Shouldn't the people who are being 'liberated' be asked first whether they'd mind if many of them would die in the process?

Do you think the US population would have supported this war if the only reason presented for it would have been to remove a dictator?

If not, do you think it is allright for the government to make up (lie about) other reasons (WMDs ect) in order to get popular support for this (or any) war?

If the US should be the police of the world to remove evil dictators, then what do you think the fact that not only does Bush leave various other dictators where they are, but actually does business with them (ie China)?

And if the US should remove dictators then what do you think of the fact that the US has actually installed many of the dictators in the world (including Saddam), typically in nations opposed to the US idea of 'free' trade (ie Chile)?