First:
Martin Sheen: West Wing?
Michael Douglas: That movie where he fell for that woman while he was president and then it was like upcoming election and the other party started bashing her? I can't remember what the movie was called though.
Bill Pullman: Independance Day
Now,
The invasion of Iraq wasn't directly related to September 11th, but the two are still linked in what they represent. It was the threat Iraq posed, and their potential to pose a very serious threat to the region and to us here. Personally I think it should have happened a long time ago. Saddam laughed at sanctions for years, adding a few more would have accomplished nothing. Weapons inspections don't work and believing that they do is a dangerous way to be lulled into a false sense of security and prior TO 9/11 we in NA had grown so complacent. We felt untouchable on our continent, and could deploy weapons into remote regions that would let us attack our enemies without ever presenting them with a target.
The conflict with Iraq has been a LONG time coming and we found ourself in the situation we were in late in 2002 because of Clinton's utter failure in foreign policy. He did absolutely nothing for eight years, while Saddam continuously defied the United Nations, and the League of Nations... er.. the UN rather - sat there making resolutions and not standing behind them. The world as a whole has a credibility problem of having convictions and not standing by them, Bush showed that we are willing to act alone when need be.
The UN supporting an oil embargo, and a no-fly zone accomplished nothing. Saddam was left in power, the people were the ones who suffered and we shrugged our shoulders saying, "not our fault, it's Saddam!"
The UN inspectors were a waste of time in the first place. Saddam had no intention of compliance and you can grow and store biological weapons in a small place. You don't need an enormous factory. You can make chemical weapons and stockpile them in a remote location - hell bury them in the sand and you won't find them unless you know where they are. These weapons can easilly still be hidden in Iraq. When the Iraqis refused to allow inspectors in to different areas we didn't ask the UN's permission, there was no resolution, Clinton gave the order to fire some missles and they were fired.
The UN failed on the Iraq situation entirely. The French with the outward decision to veto any resolution that could bring about an invasion crippled the UN and basically brought about a situation in which Saddam couldn't lose whether he complied or not. If you have an expansionist government with a history of violence and the potential capability to attack neighbors with weapons of mass destruction (which doesn't have to be nuclear weapons), and anti-western philosophy, how can you sit and do nothing? Talk some more? hehe there were 12 years to talk. If Saddam was going to cooperate he would've done it. What were his reasons for not allowing inspectors to go where they wanted? "Oh well you wanted to see inside my houses and it was rude."
Clinton's missile attacks in Iraq in 1996 were to get himself re-elected. The bombing of the pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan during the scandals about Monica were to get the news media to focus on something else. When he did launch these attacks, he didn't seek the approval of the UN first, he just did it. The difference was he was doing them as a smoke & mirrors diversion. It was about time someone stood up for what was RIGHT instead of saying "can't we all just get along?" Saddam didn't wanna get along.
The trial of Saddam Husein will come in time. It needs to be decided who the trial will be performed by. There are a lot of issues to deal with in respect to Saddam's trial. The new "official" Iraqi gov't hasn't been formed yet and until that happens you won't see a trial.
The war of 1812 was to "liberate" Canada from British "oppression", bringing Canada into the United States, but it had little to do with any American soldiers being held abroad. It would have been successful had the Canadians joined in the way the Americans believed they would, but basically a lot of the Canadians were all the loyalists who left the US after the declaration of independance so it didn't work out the way everyone thought it would. It wasn't a war against British policies, it was a war to remove British influence from North America and to expand the US.
When you go to war with someone, it's to be assumed that prisoners will be taken (that or we could have shot everyone as an alternative). I agree the said prisoners should not be held indefinitely, turning around once the Taliban were removed from power, then putting the prisoners on a boat and shipping them back to afghanistan wouldn't make any sense. They're not being tortured, beaten, etc.
We haven't lost what it means to be American. We can still stand on any street corner and protest the actions of our government, and we can exercise our political power by voting, and lobbying our elected representatives. To me being an American is standing up what you believe in regardless of what the consequences may be. That's what the declaration of independance was all about. The signatures on it labelled each man who signed it a traitor to Britain, but they did it because it was what they felt was right. Bush may have some ideas that are contrary to mine, but I'm very glad we've had him to lead us over the past four years so that we didn't hide behind the UN over these four years. Weapons inspections do not work. The Russians had an enormous chemical & biological development program for years. American weapons inspectors inspected the actual factory in which they were developing the weapons and found nothing. If Bush had done nothing, and nine months from now there was a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack against the US everyone would have called him a coward and a failure.
The UN failed by not reaching a resolution that would satisfy those involved. This happened because parties in the UN were not willing to state that failure to comply would result in the Iraqi government being forceably removed. Force, violence, and power were the only thing Saddam would understand and respect. Americans have come off as being wrong in the eyes of parts of the world before on issues people don't question today. Time will tell
