Sunday, December 30, 2007
Iraq an Obvious “Just War”
Terrorism piece by
Kevin Roeten
Only those that fall into specific categories dare to believe that the Iraq War was not “just”. Many seem to be under certain misconceptions about the Iraq conflict with erroneous rumors.
It seems obvious that if someone doesn’t like Bush’s moral stand (abortion, federal funding embryonic stem cell research, illegal drugs, etc…) they will hate almost every other decision Bush makes. Emotion seems to be in high gear.
Many refuse to believe any conservative view of the Iraq War. It is a given that Bush has more resources than almost anybody on the planet. The President has always had more information on what the dangers to Americans were, military capabilities possessed by every country, atrocities committed by Hussein, and essentially any WMD Hussein had.
All four conditions for a “Just War” have been arguably met. Every country’s intelligence agency said the same thing—Hussein had WMDs, and was going to use them. Hussein ignored 19 resolutions made by the UN after the 1st Gulf War, blatantly lied (Blix/ UN inspector) on his 14,000 page report, had contacts in Niger pursuing yellowcake for nuclear weapons (Brit Intelligence), and tried to shoot down allied jets in the no-fly zone.
Few mention the documentation found in one of Hussein’s palaces [fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products.docex.htm]. It was obvious (particularly on that website) that Hussein aided and abetted radical terrorist groups routinely. In the Freedom of Information Act it was admitted that over 300,000 troops likely breathed small doses of sarin gas during the initial incursion—proof positive Hussein had WMDs.
No person, upon understanding all of the critical information regarding Hussein, could ever deny the incursion was not “just”. Did the majority of the populace not get all the pertinent information, or did they just not like someone indicating that their “lifestyle” might be incorrect?
Many people, even some Catholics, said John Paul II was against the incursion. The pope did not like killing at all—as most don’t. But he never said the conflict was ‘immoral’. It seems he had already been advised of Hussein’s threats, killings, and atrocities.
Some make two false assumptions: 1) this conflict was not warranted because no 9/11 terrorist was born in Iraq, and 2) the Allies ‘invaded’ a sovereign nation.
A terrorist doesn’t have to be born in Iraq to train for terrorism on a Boeing 707 fuselage in downtown Baghdad (Salman Pak). The incursion was to dethrone Hussein only, and it did so. The oft-used word ‘invasion’ cannot be applied. No civilians were purposely targeted, no land was grabbed, no specific type of government was demanded, no national riches (e.g., oil) were taken, and no chosen leader was installed.
Later, when terrorists attacked the allies, the conflict was upgraded to the “War on Terror”. If Iraq was not a major terrorist ‘weigh’ station, why would they continually obliterate all the allies with IEDs? Any terrorist would likely hide and fight another day—and, on their own terms. But the terrorists seem to badly want Iraq. As General Petraeus said, Iraq was the major front for terrorism.
It seems obvious that any retreat from Iraq, before the Iraqis can take care of themselves, sends the direct message—“We don’t have the stomach for any deaths, and you can have your way.” It’s interesting that Iraqi citizens are now immigrating back into Iraq once they see that the ‘surge’ is now displacing the terrorists.
Many forget Islamic history. The meaning of ‘Islam’ in Arabic is not ‘peace’, but ‘submission’. In the Qu’ran, the duty for all Muslims to fight for Allah’s community is ‘jihad’, translated---‘struggle; fight’.
The Muslims have been conquering lands since Mohammed. Egypt and Syria were initially Christian, but were overrun by Muslims. The Crusades were only directed at Muslims who had conquered and still held Christian lands. Unfortunately, 9/11 cemented the radical Muslim conflict.
We must admit that a major dividing line has been drawn between most Americans. But raw emotions won’t change that—correct information will.
A few recent events illuminating this huge divide are morality, man-made global warming, and the Iraq War. Many others can be pointed out.
There can only be unification if everyone is operating from the same page. The lack of rationality to look at all the information and to believe your morality is the only morality is getting progressively worse.
The category those put themselves into by not believing information on the Iraq War (and other topics) can, and has been, detrimental to many Americans. For all those men and women who died fighting for our freedom, we hope they forgave those unpatriotic citizens.
Kevin Roeten
http://kevinroeten.us/
HowardWasRight 
more...
more... 
