Lately it is quite appropriate that the elephant is the
Republican mascot; the party’s recent rhetoric regarding the
war on Iraq makes about as much sense as what those animals fling
at zoo passersby.
The only true reason to justify war on Iraq is plainly
self-interest, but the Republicans have come up with their own
whiny, bleeding-heart reasons to placate a handful of crying
pacifists, who would rather die than raise a finger in defense.
Hussein is cited as a madman and dictator who rapes and kills,
maims and tortures. It is our duty to stop this terrible madman and
make the world safe for democracy.
The result of this whimpering is that anti-war pacifists and
liberals have good arguments to counter George Bush’s
stammering. It is true that the United States has helped dictators
before and regime changes have historically led to other dictators
taking power. Furthermore other dictators exist who treat their
people just as harshly and other countries have already developed
horrible weapons.
Until Bush goes beyond these peripheral, albeit relevant,
reasons for war on Iraq and gets to the true cause of the matter,
there will always exist rational dissent.
It is simply in the interest of the United States and its
citizens that Hussein be brought down, tarred and feathered, and
that his entire infrastructure and weaponry be deactivated.
The purpose of the United States government, as established by
the ideals of the founding fathers, is to protect the life,
liberty, and property of its citizens. It is not to ensure that the
United States police the world, protect other nations, and give
handouts to everyone while taxing heavily.Â
In accordance with these criteria, we helped the Taliban when it
was in our best interest to weaken the Soviet Union. We supported
Iraq when Iran was the largest threat. And we helped the Soviet
Union when Germany and Japan were the greater threat during World
War II.
We did not support and/or create these dictatorships out of a
general feeling of duty to the world, or to make the world safe for
Democracy. We did it because it was the proper action for the
government to take to protect the life, liberty, and property of
its citizens.
World War II serves as a perfect example of proper reasoning for
entering a war. It was true that Hitler was a madman bent on world
control, eradicating groups of people from the earth, and gross
crimes against humanity. It is a travesty that he rose to
power.
But the United States was wise to stay neutral until the war
directly threatened the people living under its governance. If we
had entered early, the United States might have ended up like
Britain, broke and unable to continue fighting due to leveled
infrastructure. By waiting until it was in our best interest, and
it was apparent that the war effort would pay off, we led a
campaign to rid the world of some of the most terrible men in
history.
Iraq is the same way. It is a direct threat to the existence of
the American way of life. And while Iraq has not directly attacked
us yet, Hussein has shown constant antagonism and hatred toward our
country. Furthermore, Iraq has also shown the ability and will to
destroy innocent countries and people during Desert Storm. Lastly,
diplomacy has proven unsuccessful, unlike in other hostile
countries where options still exist. With such a terrible record,
it is ignorant to think Hussein would hesitate to assault the
United States if given the opportunity.
That is why we must act swiftly, despite what the United Nations
instructs. The U.N. countries that are anti-war have their own
interests in mind too. War with Iraq would mean the loss of years
of diplomacy, business and negotiations.
So until Bush sweeps the elephant dung aside and cites pure
self-interest as the true reason for a war, there will always be
good reasons to avoid conflict. The only argument against
self-interest is that the United States should deny its founding
principles.