:: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 ::

*WARNING* Political Opinions Inside

I don't like arguing my opinions. Usually I find that I don't have enough time to think of what I want to say or how I want to say it. Anyway, the point of this entry is that I had a discussion about the impending war with a friend the other day, and the situation I described above occurred. Now that I've figured out how I'd like to respond, I can't seem to sleep for thinking about it. As it's my journal, I thought I'd respond now, here, and be done with it. I'm not sure if she reads this journal, but that's not the point - I'm not one to run back two days later and dredge up an old argument. Besides, I don't want to convince anyone with this. I just need to... say it. So here it goes...

My friend's argument was that war should be supported because Saddam Hussein is an evil bastard who is terrible to his people, and in the long run it will benefit them to be rid of him. Of course, I agree with this. Do I think that it's a good reason to go to war? Maybe (even despite my pacifism). Do I think that it is WHY we are headed toward war? No. And herein lies the problem. If the US was running full tilt into conflict for the benefit of the Iraqi people, then sure, maybe I wouldn't be so against it. But they're not. They're going on their own agenda. Further, looking to past conflicts, it is the Iraqi people who will likely suffer most. I am not only referring to the fact that the shit will be bombed out of them. What about the possibility that the importing of food will be blocked in an attempt to starve the country into submission? Of course, Saddam is an evil fucker and he probably wouldn't care, so maybe no one will try this tactic. But they tried it on Germany during WWII, and did we think Hitler would care? I digress. Anyway, so let's just pretend they DO manage to rid Iraq of Saddam. What will be left? A population of people that is likely depleted, starved, and in complete political turmoil. At this point, what will happen? I think it's pretty idealistic to think that the US will give a shit. I see them just pulling out and leaving the war-torn country to solve its own problems. Of course, it should also be noted that, in this state, Iraq would be very susceptable to being taken over by yet another dictator. Now, if the US was willing to stick around, help with relief, bring the country to political and economic stability, then great. But I'm sorry, I just can't see them doing that. Maybe I'm a pessimist, maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's a pretty big fucking risk to take. The point is that, in my view, Bush is not trying to rid Iraq of Hussein, he is trying to rid the US of Hussein. This is a pretty important distinction.

And also, it has to be said... if Hussein doesn't have the right to possess weapons of mass destruction (and I don't think he does)... why does Bush? Because it seems to me that only one country has ever dropped a nuclear bomb... oh wait, was that the States? Oh, that's right, it was. Funny.

So there's my rant. Please keep in mind that I don't want to have to defend it - I just needed somewhere to say it.

And could someone enlighten me... exactly when did the "evil bad guy" focus get turned from Bin Laden to Hussein? I can't really remember what the turning point was...

:: Katy 1:25 a.m. [+] :: ::