No. It wasn't. Despite the inhuman things Saddem Hussein did to his people, his actions still amounted to genoside which in itself is a humanitarian issue and not necessarily a military issue. And even if military action were necessary, such a decree for the use of force would have to come from NATO, not America.
GW Bush got his justification for war w/Iraq based not on the humanitarianism issue, but rather on the threat of Iraq possessing, manufacturing and concealing WMDs that could be used by Muslim extremist who wished to do harm to this nation in a post- 9/11 environment. I submit that humanitarian aid is not necessarily justification for war atleast not by a single nation where such genocide is NOT being inflected upon the "invading" nation. Pilliging and wrongful occupation is one thing; to that, America coming to the defense of Kuwait was the right thing to do. But a pre-emptive strike against Iraq - a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11 and possed no threat to this nation...no, sir. That war was NOT justified. Not in the slightest.
Now, please, don't hijack this thread.
Last edited by Objective Voice; 12-02-09 at 11:30 AM.
Last night was like an address from Obama to the Taliban and al-Quaeda.
"Hey, you guys just hunker down for a year or two, and I'll get these troops out of the way for ya! Deal?"
And to think this man knows our greatest national secrets and stratagies.
Ya, hunker down while we re-build the afghan army and have 30,000 more troops attacking them.
I believe we'll succeed when the poppy crops are all burned.
Just because we pull out of Afghanistan does not cease operations in combating A.Q. and the Taliban.
The problem we are facing is that we are trying to Nation build in Afghanistan, as we dismiss the Afghani Government. We cannot stop corruption through military force.
Also, take note that the military surge is just one facet of the strategy. The most important step, and easily the hardest step, is trying to Westernize Afghanistan; building infrastructure, building schools, etc.
The Media's criticisms of the Obama address only reinforce that the American mainsteam media is absolutely inept to make any fundamental change in the way we approach the premise of the Afghanistan war.
N.A.T.O and Europe has spoken; they do not support this war. Sure, they send 5,000 troops, but the best estimates, to duplicate the success we had in Iraq, is to bring the troop total to 600,000.
"I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann
Just what would you have him do? Pull out? Why when clearly extremist are STILL trying to inflect harm upon this country. You'd really be able to claim this was another Vietnam then. We left there before the mission was done as well.
The FBI/CIA recently arrested a domestic terrorist who allegedly received his instructions (third party) from Al Quaida/Taliban members abroad. We just had a rogue soldier attack his fellow servicemen and women at Ft. Hood, someone who likely also received his instructions from members associated with Al Quaida, and you want the President to order the troops out of Afghanistan? You want him to pull out of the "just" war, the same war former VP Cheney claimed the President was "dithering" over prior to finally making his decision to stay the course with a new strategy?
I have one word for the both of you: COWARDS!