Yawn, I guess I haven’t really spoken much on it recently

It seems like it’s been quite a while since I discussed the war on terrorism or anything related to that sort. I just wanted to point out how amusing it is to listen to the news update. Today, for example, there was a report saying that the troops might assume bin Laden is dead. I’ve always taken a story stating that bin Laden is still alive to mean that the military has no other newsworthy events that day. Why does it really matter whether bin Laden is dead or not? There’s always going to be some ill-minded person looking to seek destruction on innocent people for irrational reasons. It’s not like ther’ll be reason to celebrate if bin Laden dies, or anyone else in al Qaeda. Do you really think they’re the only ones plotting destruction against the tenets of liberty?

And about the situation about going after Saddam. Yes, he’s a scoundrel, but you can’t just attack a sovereign nation like you can go after a certain group which doesn’t belong to any particular nation. If we have to go after Saddam, it can only be after we can prove he’s struck first, or perhaps helped those who would strike first. Personally, I don’t think he’s that stupid. Perhaps if a rebel movement occurred within Iraq, we could help them like we helped the Nothern Alliance in Afghanistan depose the Taliban. It can’t be a group of outsiders coming to say, “Hey, we’ve come to take your leader away, haha.” And all of this talk about Bush requiring Congressional approval to launch an invasion is bull, since he alone is Commander-in Chief, not he and Congress. It’s true that Bush can’t declare war, but since when has Congress actually declared war anyway? It seems then we didn’t go after the Axis until they were well on their way to conquering their various territories (and only after we were attacked at Pearl Harbor, two years into WWII). If we could somehow ascertain whther Saddam has definite plans to do soem conquering of his own, than perhaps we would have launch a preemptive strike. But like I said, I don’t think he’s going to do something that tells the world that he aims to conquer the Arab world. If you know anything about geography, Iraq’s sort of surrounded, and I don’t think the manpower exists to branch out in four different directions. Why Nazi Germany could make the conquests it did was because it had much more support, therefore recruitment was probably much higher. There also was really only two directions that the army had to branch out, whereas, Iraq has four ways to go. Thus, all really Saddam could do is launch long range weapons to harm anyone. This is what needs to be proven, and if it can be proven, than I’m all for ridding the world of this regime. But it’s not going to be easy. These kinds of conflicts never are.

I’m just waiting for people to point out my historical inaccuracies now ;).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s