Sunday, May 04, 2003

The justification for war in Iraq, the way Bush administration put it, was that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction AND that he was so creasy he would sooner or later use it against America. Some hardliners in White House even suggested Saddam was ready to hire terrorists to smuggle those weapons into the US and use them right there to kill Americans. To preempt this America sent its troops to Iraq, fought for a month and did not face a single use of any chemical/biological/nuclear weapon. Well, looks like Saddam was not that creasy after all. Therefore, even if any such weapons are found now it does not prove anything. The preemptive strike on Iraq is highly questionable now, simply because Saddam did not use those imaginary weapons even to save his regime from invaders let alone using them senselessly inside America.
Otherwise, if America's only intention was to free Iraqis(see 'political snobbery') then why don't they go about freeing all other nations from brutal dictators? There are so many of them.

I am sorry I seem to back Saddam. He was a brutal dictator and I have always hated him. But the philosophy behind the 'preemptive strike' doctrine of Mr. Bush is so scary and irrational that I can hardly force myself to behave every time I here something about it.


  © Blogger template 'SimpleBlue' by 2008

Back to TOP