An opinion...
It is amazing to recognize the ethnocentricity of the American public, in general. From my interpretation of the majority of posts to this thread, many of you call for little to no public dissent of the Administration, censoring of the US press and unconditional acceptance of the President's policies. I beg you - tell mean what conditions plagued pre-war Iraq?
Many of you quote that "45 countries" are supporting our war. Of a world of ~192 independent nations, I would hardly call this a motivating statistic for supporting the engagement. In contrast, when the International Court of Justice treaty was brought before the US Senate, a mere ~12 nations, including the US, refused to take part. This is same court that would theoretically try war criminals - like the Iraqi soldiers possibly mistreating American POWs.
Many Americans believe that democracy and civil freedoms should be firmly planted and take root in the Middle East. I, personally, would love to see the freedoms that I enjoy exist throughout the world, however, I recognize that historical, cultural and religious characteristics unique to various parts of the world, including the Middle East, do not provide for such a realization. The plain and simple fact of the matter is that the socio-cultural structure that exists in the Middle East will not allow an American-style republic to be established - and attempting to coerce one through war will definitely not help the cause. We must recognize that while "our way" may be the best way for us, it may not be the best way for everyone else.
Another topic covered in this thread was the Franco-Germanic opposition to the war. I have but one thing to say - they are independent nations and have the right to formulate their own individual foreign policy. Many of you have stated in this and other threads that France should know better considering our aid to them during both WWs. Well, should they be beholden to us for that aid in the same sense that we should be beholden to them for their aid during our fight for independence? Had the French fleet not arrived at Yorktown, we may still have been flying Union Jacks to this day. Just as the US obstained from the ICJ and expected no fanfare, France and Germany have the same right in this case.
The most pressing issue that I see is the complete lack of consistency in applying foreign policy by the Bush Administration. Iraq opened its borders to UN inspectors, provided documentation and evidence as to its weapons program and continuously met demands by the UN (destruction of Al-Samoud missiles and various empty warheads) yet we rush to invasion. On the other hand, North Korea, which we know without any uncertainty had a nuclear program, now ejects UN inspectors, restarts plutonium production, refuses ALL UN and US demands and threatens millions of people, yet the DoS simply says, "We want to open a dialogue." To me, this seems to be an unfair and dangerous double standard.
Is Hussein a saint? Far from it. Does he have WMD? Possibly. Did the UN finish its inspections satisfactorily? Definitely not. Is this invasion in direct violation of UN resolutions? Not sure - kind of fuzzy. Should the US government have allow the inspections to continue? In my opinion, yes. Has the US set a poor precedent for future nations to give the UN a big middle finger and ignore international law? Undoubtly.
All of this being said, I voice my dissent for the decision of the Bush Administration (as I would were it the McCain, Gore or Clinton administraions). But I also respect the integrity of the US Armed Forces in their following the orders of our Commander-in-Chief and wish them a speedy and safe return home.
)
