Monday, October 8, 2007

Just Cause

Pick a side, for or against the occupation in Iraq. Is the occupation just? Was it just in the beginning and now its not? or were we led to believe that it was just in the beginning, and there were really alternative motives behind the occupation in Iraq. Again I think this is one of those topics that it all depends on what documents you read, and who you talk to. I believe in the beginning, the occupation in Iraq was given a just cause. It was given a reason for the U.S. to invade Iraq to protect the United States and therefore that's what we did. We may have pre-maturely invaded without the UN finishing their inspections, but we invaded under the notion of find Sadam and weapons of mass destruction and rid the country of both. We have yet to find wmds to this point, but we did find Sadam, take him out of power, and execute him.
Many people today, still critize the occupation, because we are still in Iraq. There is really no reason beyond that, but we are still there and people don't like it. Nonetheless we can't just pull out, after all that we have done to that country. The American Soldiers have done a lot of good in Iraq and they are over there doing their jobs.

1 comment:

David K. Braden-Johnson said...

If a preemptive attack on Iraq was justified because of suspicions re WMD, then what does that say about other "unfriendly" nations, especially those who clearly do have WMD?