More than 580 Americans have died in Iraq; roughly 10,000 have been wounded.
American taxpayers have spent hundreds of billions of dollars. We must
not be afraid to face these facts and understand the terrible cost of war.
Were these sacrifices worth it? To answer that question, we have to look
at the justifications given for our invasion of Iraq.
One justification was that Saddam Hussein ignored United Nations Security
Council resolutions. Whether this was true or not was none of our concern.
America should never act at the behest of the UN or help enforce its illegitimate
edicts. America should never commit troops to any UN action. We should
not even be a member of the UN, but rather should ignore it completely.
Membership in the UN is incompatible with our Constitution and national
sovereignty. It was nonsensical for conservatives suddenly to cite Iraq’s
purported lack of cooperation with the UN as justification for war.
The second justification for invading Iraq was that Mr. Hussein posed a
threat to the United States. This was not true. Hussein had only a small
army, and virtually no navy or air force. He had no long-range weapons
and no ability to strike the US 6,000 miles away. He was not working with
bin Laden or al Qaeda terrorists. He was a despicable tyrant at home, but
the liberation of Iraq from his clutches was given as a new justification
only after the American public had absorbed overwhelming evidence that
he posed no threat to us.
|
"Is America better off as a result of our war in Iraq? The young men and
women who were hurt or killed certainly are no better off. Their families
are no better off. Taxpayers are no better off." |
|
Is America better off as a result of our war in Iraq? The young men and
women who were hurt or killed certainly are no better off. Their families
are no better off. Taxpayers are no better off. Whether we are safer from
terrorism here at home is an open question. We all hope and pray nothing
happens. But even our own intelligence forces cautioned that an invasion
and occupation of Muslim Iraq could breed resentment among sympathetic
Muslims and serve as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda. As commentator Lew
Rockwell states, “It is not caving in to the bees to stop poking a stick
into their hive.”
Are the Iraqis better off? Saddam is gone, along with his murderous cohorts,
and that certainly presents a positive opportunity for the Iraqi people.
But we cannot be sure that the Hussein regime will be replaced by something
better. Iraq is still very unstable and divided between Sunni, Shiite,
and Kurd factions. Civil war could ensue upon the departure of American
troops.
Even if we assume that anything will be an improvement over the Hussein
regime, the fundamental question remains: Why should young Americans be
hurt or killed to liberate foreign nations? I have never heard a convincing
answer to this question. If we sacrifice 500 lives to liberate Iraq, should
we sacrifice five million American lives to liberate the people of North
Korea, Taiwan, Tibet, China, Cuba, and countless African nations? Should
we invade every country that has an oppressive government? Are nation-building
and empire part of our national credo? Those who answer yes to these questions
should have the integrity to admit that our founders urged the opposite
approach, namely a foreign policy rooted in staying out of the affairs
of other nations.
|
