The UN did not resolve to end the issue with with force. Part of the reason was because the lead weapons inspector did not believe there were WMDs in Iraq.

We were certain though!

How is that search going? Or have we forgotten the original excuse for going in there and moved on to the terrorists (who never trained there) or democracy (which will never happen with the current leadership and coalitions)….

But we were not there for oil, that is for sure!

High tech mugging by the world’s (former) bully… The funny thing about all of the chest beating is that the war proved one thing – we are not the super power we used to be – and we will pay for losing the deterrent value and the weakening of the economy due to a war that will probably top out at a total cost of $3 trillion.

If you are so pro Iraq war how about you cut me a check for my family’s $30K share of the cost, we’ll call it even!

There’s our fundamental difference. You say it wasn’t “legitimate” I say it was. All else considered, Saddam’s wanton violation of UN weapons resolutions for 13 years was reason enough. What good is the UN if its resolutions aren’t backed up with force?

During my tactical service, I considered that ‘The leaders of my country would make those decisions, on foreign policy.’

Once we decide to go the deaths are still our responsibility. No matter how professionally and responsibly the civilians we kill at checkpoints, as collateral damage in bombings, or due to suicide bombers from the resistance – we created the war. We also created the resistance, the majority of the ‘enemy’ did not exist until we went to get ‘our’ oil. We sent the people and equipment there and we destabilized the country.

Iraq was not a legitimate war in the first place. We were not defending ourselves, this was a war of opportunism. This was using a horrible attack on our soil that originated for the most part in Saudi Arabia and using it as an excuse to execute an invasion that the Neo-Cons have been discussing since 1992. They never talked about peace and democracy, they talked about regime change for energy security.

I respect anyone who has military experience. It does not give you a trump card in any discussion of foreign policy.

Those details were stated with a straight face.

You know when the origin of Islamic Fundamentalism was as a political and religious movement? Was not until the 50’s… after we and the Brits had worked their governments and their ways of life over and they started realizing they had something underground worth fighting over…

‘We do a damn good job minimizing civilian casualties, an extraordinary feat considering we’re fighting a largely urban war where insurgents like to use civilians as shields.’

As Roger Watters called it – ‘The Bravery of Being Out of Range’ – much easier to justify when it is someone else’s friends and family… very Christian of you…

No, we just have wildly different understandings of the brutality of war throughout history. We do a damn good job minimizing civilian casualties, an extraordinary feat considering we’re fighting a largely urban war where insurgents like to use civilians as shields.

Brian – Let’s not even get into Israel here. I do agree with you on one point though. If the mideast had no oil we’d completely ignore them and let them all slaughter each other (the way we ignore Africa.

Nevermind that refugee camps have practically become towns in Africa..

Agreed – self defense against someone you have done nothing outside your rights to antagonize is justifiable. After that it is a slippery slope.

Put as many justifications on it, end of the day we are there for access to discounted oil and no bid contracts. I guess the exercise is to figure out how many bodies you think you can justify for he thing you want… my problem is that a wealthy and free nation has to invent the excuses to justify this stuff as it is pure greed and opportunism. We could have conserved, we could have raised fuel economy standards, we could have pursued economic policies that discourage so much importation of so many resources… we choose to kill people instead.

If they were white people here in Delaware and we actually saw the bodies on the news I think the great moral relavatism in the justification of war might be approached a little differently.

I think if it were our people we would not consider the justification quite the same way.

Cracks me up to watch Bush talk about national soverignty for Georgia! The Russians said the same thing to us about Iraq 5 years ago…

he forgot about the few wedding parties we took out by “accident”

We’ve grown accustomed to “war” being something with precision-guided bombs that hit specific targets and rarely if ever kill civilains, where churches, hospitals, etc. are “safe zones.”

I guess we’re not thinking of the same war, here.

Why we go to war, and our conduct during that war, is far superior to almost all other countries

Please tell me how trying to acquire access to more oil is morally superior to, let’s say, struggling for independence/struggling against separatists to preserve one’s nation.