Can Iraq ever be justified? What do you think and WHY?
83488
Will the war ever be justified to someone like you? As can be seen from your question, no.  You have already made up your mind.  \n\nSaddam Hussein was a ruthless dictator who killed millions, used WMDs, and numerous intelligence sources stated that he was ready to use them again.\nMillions of Iraqis who are free to now vote for their own futures believe the war was justified.  Millions of children who can go to school and learn, allowing Iraq to move into the 21st century will make the war worth it.\n\nNaysayers like you would have stopped after Gettysburg, saying the loss of life isn't worth it.  You would have pulled troops out in the middle of Normandy, since Germany never attacked us, Japan did.\n\nEach day Iraqi that wakes up with his and her God-given freedom to do as s/he wishes and live a good life is justification.
394032
Peace:  It is completely immoral to kill 10,000+ innocent civilians in Iraq, regardless of whether or not there is a connection to 9/11 (and there isn't).  If a suspected terrorist lived in Texas, would the appropriate action be to bomb Texas?  Completely Illogical!\n\nThe idea of "preemptive strike" is also ridiculous.  If I believe that I may be beaten by a racist police officer, should I have the right to shoot him first for the sake of safety?  Completely Illogical!\n\nIt is not that the Bush II administration are totally foolish (although they are often painted that way), but they are simply pursuing their own interests, and these interests are at odds with the interests of most people.  What happened to democracy in the US?
930649
so are you arguing that we should stay in Iraq or not?  Because you say you can use sources why we should stay, BUT you are against withdrawal.  those are the same things.
573756
That depends on the resolution.  If we pull out and Iraq has a civil war, then no.  If Congress finally sends the necessary number of troops to secure the country for the 75 years - YES I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT'S HOW LONG IT WILL BE - then very eventually, it will be worth it.
876408
Obviously, this is a very subjective question.\n\nIf I were an Iraqi who mysteriously lost a loved one who was subsequently dug up in a mass grave years later by American troops - the answer is a resounding, yes.\n\nIf I am a critic of the war and feel, despite the overall conditions of the country under Saddam, that it was more "stable" before we ousted him, I would answer, no.\n\nBoth answers would be honest and the truth - depending on ones perspective.
412719
The War was not "Legal", if any war could be justified in Law. Saddam was an Evil Dictator, but there are plenty of those in the World, some of the Allied to the USA (Hello Saudi Arabia!) There were no WMD's, but Loads of Oil, and no one seemed to have a clue what to do After we got rid of old Saddam. I think the Western powers did all they could to keep civilian casualties to a minimum, but I also believe that the USA and Britain went to war to secure a strategic resource, and for no other reason. 9/1 had nothing to do with Iraq, and that is a given. I think depending on the outcome History will judge the war as a naked show of aggression against a foreign power, with good or bad results. We will see.
262405
Indeed, I wonder how long he'd last on the streets of Baghdad! I think one would have to be extremely politically correct to worry whether or not Saddam's getting a fair trial... Sad though it is - and a noble experiment - Bush's plan to bring democracy to Iraq has predictably turned to crap; give them democracy and they'll elect an autocratic cleric or madman. The Middle East typically produces characters like Saddam, essentially because that's what it wants. You can't educate people who are stuck in the Dark Ages.
757967
Huge mistake is correct.  What could possibly be wise about the whole exercise?  Wise to put the shiites in power thus strengthening Iran?  Wise to kill 150,000 Iraqis?  Wise to put our soldiers in the middle of a civil war?  Is it wise to execute Saddam thus heightening the sectarian violence?  Nothing about it is wise.
300332
I suspected Greasy was trying to line up statements justifying the invasion of Iraq, but he claims he's not and added a negative for the chaotic democracy, that if you speak out you're more likely to be assassinated.  I'm still pointing out that the analogy to Iraq--intended or not--is not accurate.  The forces of democracy also face a military occupation that is widely detested, and infiltration by violent radical foreigners, and you're in danger of sliding into poverty because the economy is falling apart.\n\nIf I pretend this isn't a question about Iraq but a generic country, I'd take the chaotic democracy because most countries aren't as dysfunctional as Iraq is now, and in a fluid situation there is more hope for improvement than in a static situation such as a powerful dictator in total control.  Russia had chaotic democracy for a while and regressed to something like a Latin American pseudo-democracy, but I'd rather have lived through that than Stalin's or Brezhnev's regimes.\n\nI will still point out that the US has a shameful record of trading freedom for supposed security after 9/11.  The authors of the Bill of Rights would be disturbed to see a president repeal large chunks of it by fiat.  Anyone who voted for Bush in 2004 and now dares to lecture the Iraqis about how they should value freedom over security is profoundly hypocritical or uninformed.
286661
Saddam committed his alleged crimes within the boundaries of Iraq and should be subject to Iraqi justice if indeed he is found to be guilty.  I have believed all along that the Iraqi people are the ones that need to handle whatever is to be Saddam's fate.  \n\nIn view of the controversy surrounding the death of Slobodan Milosevic, I am a lot more comfortable that Saddam will receive actual justice and we will not have to worry about this kind of thing putting a cloud over the whole thing.
866315
Still comparing things that are irrelevant to each other?\n\nBy the way, when did we take Iraq?  Seems to me the fighting is still going, despite "Mission Accomplished."
262358
Oh Well, this is a tough one. \n\nAlthough I would like to believe that the current Iraqi situation could sustain itself, I must be realistic in my assesment of the situation. I believe that Iraq will fall apart due to the collapse and absence of a powerful cental government. Saddam was tough, but he held the country together. I think we're gonna end up having to deal with THREE NEW Iraqi states (Northern Kurds, Central Sunnis and Southern Shiites) and I just don't like the sound of that, why deal with three when we there was only one?\n\nBesides, the Shiites in the South will most likely control the larger sum of Iraq's Oil cause that's where it's concentrated. \n\nI still believe, contrary to popular belief, that Saddam could have been dealt with differently, either through micro surgery, or through hard-core diplomacy until he crumbled on his own, this all out invasion is just costing us ridiculous ammounts of money and rubbing our global reputation in the dirt. \n\nThe world is changing, we're loosing favour with hundreds of millions of people, and I just don't want that for my country, a country that I love.
1068503
Preemptive war is never justifiable. We had no right to invade Iraq and have no right to stay there. Only continuing heavy handed brutality will allow us to remain. When we finally leave, Iraq will disolve into several nations based on the boundaries and ethnic differences that existed prior the British military occupation of that region in 1920. These colors don't run... the world. We have the strongest military force that has ever existed on the planet and are the biggest bullies that exist on the planet today.Propaganda fed to us by the corporate owned media make us see the illusion rather than the truth. Our foreign policy is soley based on what is deemed to promote the interests of our major corporate rulers.
135224
Personally, no war can be considered justified. Common citizens of rival countries usually don't have any real reason to kill each other. Their governments make them think there is a reason.
1010801
The “just war” doctrine requires rigorous consideration to determine if defense by military force is legitimate. Offensive war is never justified. \n\nAll the following considerations must be true to justify war:\n1. The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;\n2. All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;\n3. There must be serious prospects of success;\n4. The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. \n\nIt has been argued the pre-war Iraq:\n1. Was not inflicting lasting, grave and certain damage to the United States;\n2. Could have been influenced by diplomatic and international sanctions.\n\nIt is argued now that:\n3. There is not a serious prospect of success;\n4. The use of arms has produced evils and disorders greater than the evil eliminated.\n\nWith love in Christ.
716270
"I have a plan"\n\ncyndie yes I can. stay untill the iraqi people can defend them selves and have established a govt that is sustainable for atleast the near future.  And anybody that is against that "kill them" its not easy but world politics and world safety is not easy.  and it is going to take time.  a stability in the middle east will start in the world effort for stability
861472
Okay then, it's fairly obvious where you stand.\n\nI agree in principle with this statement:\n"This is the least Saddam deserved," \n\nThough I do not like hanging as a method of execution.