I talked a little about the changing justification(s) for Gulf War II earlier. But I need to add one important point. The Bush Administration may have been wrong. Be aware that the discussion that follows refers to the Bush Administration and not the US military or their dependents.
Yes, I know, some people are now saying it wasn't about weapons of mass destruction, it was about regime change (ask the people of many African nations about the need for regime change). It was about saving the Iraqi people from there own leader. To that I can only say you are gravely mistaken.
Remember back when the debate was centered on how one nation could attack another without first being fired upon? The sole ethical argument that could be made for this is to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the other nation had the means and the intent to harm you first.
Note, both conditions must exist otherwise the justification fails. In other words, if I see you coming towards me I am not justified to shoot you dead. If I see that you have a gun in a holster, the threat level increases but I am still not justified in shooting you. If you are coming towards me yelling and screaming at me for sleeping with your wife the threat level increase even more, but I am still not justified in shooting you. If as you come within range you pull the gun out, point it at me, and say you are going to shoot me, I am now fully justified to try to shoot you first.
In this case, the Bush Administration tried to make the case that Iraq not only possessed weapons of mass destruction but also had immediate plans to use such weapons on us. That is, if we didn't shoot first, they surely would.
If that were true, and only if that were true as far as I can see, would there be case for a preemptive attack against another nation.
At this point, I can't say for sure whether Iraq possessed such weapons and was about to use them on us. But I can tell you this, if they are not found, it doesn't matter what kind of spin the Bush Administration wants to use and it doesn't matter if the Iraqis would have used such weapons had they possessed them - if they didn't possess them there would be no justification to preemptively attack them. And even if they did have them, you must still show that they intended to use them first.
I sincerely hope these weapons are found because if they aren't, all the Bush Administration will have done is created a thousand Osama bin Ladens.
----- o0o -----
I have our graduate school presentation before the Board of Trustees and Administration of the Hawai'i public Employees' Retirement System this morning so I gotta' go.
Aloha!
