Nice response Soulforged. It appears that you really gave it some attention. I hate when posts get so big though and in an effort to keep things simple (I am at work) I wont use all the quotes and try to answer each comment with a “ya but…” answer. Note: some of my comments are not direct responses to your post but also to others.

The topic and some responses have made me wonder about some of the details and my opinions. I have done a little research online and by asking a few people I know that are better informed than me (not hard to find ), including two from the military, one of which has spent time at the Quantonimo Bay terrorist prison in Cuba. The research has led me to believe that…

The war is definitely good. That there were terrorists in Iraq prior to our invasion and that there were absolutely connections between the Iraq government and terrorists, al Qaeda in particular. I wont waver on these points. But I also feel comfortable admitting that there were few traces of them in Iraq once we invaded. It makes sense that the terrorists would leave or hide knowing that the US was coming; it wasn’t like the invasion was a surprise (I feel the same about the WMD).

I also think that there were other options available to remove Saddam from power but none that would have worked as efficiently as the use of military force, which actually accomplished several goals collaterally. Trade sanctions and the like would have taken too long and hurt the Iraq people who Saddam already showed he didn’t give a whoot about. Because terrorism is such a difficult force for the US to battle I cannot think of a better way to start stopping it than by removing a terrorist supporting government (Knowing that it was there and not stopping it, is supporting it in my view. And the already established point that I am convinced that there were connections between the Iraq government and terrorists leads me to believe that they knew that terrorists were there).

The justification of causalities both military and civilian is a bit of a gray area for me. From a selfish point of view having an Iraq government that is friendly to the US, doesn’t support terrorism and good to its people is important to me but can I attach a number to how many deaths make it worthwhile? Nope, but I think it is important that we make sure things are stable there before we leave (huge generalization).

Additionally, there are economic reasons for the US to want to stabilize Iraq with a government that is friendly to the US but Iraq is not that economically important to the us and if it didn’t even exist (No, I am not suggesting we blow it away, just making a point) I don’t think that the US would be any worse off financially. I really don’t think that lower oil prices are reason for the war. There are already two gas stations in my city that are selling cheaper partially organic gas for cars. Oil and economic gain are definitely not the reasons for the war; they may be contributing factors but absolutely not the reason.

I am also not so sure that it is the US’s “job” or “place” to police other countries for terrorism but it is certainly an option. An option that doesn’t make everyone happy but it appears to be an effective one nonetheless, as there are without a doubt less active terrorists than before the “war on terror”. Will the war in Iraq or the war on terror completely stop terrorism? Not likely, but I think the US’s show of force and abilities have and will discourage terrorists from making open attacks and then trying to hide in another country to escape persecution.

Iraq War? Good. War on terror? Good. My opinion of people that have opinions different than mine? Good (Were hypocritical bastards that enjoy freedom of speech. Try and find that in Iraq before the US invasion).

Well the size of the post got away from me but again that’s what I think.