Jay Maynard (jmaynard) wrote,
Jay Maynard
jmaynard

  • Mood:

On being sick of war

I just read nonethewiser's entry about feeling sad and sick about the war.

Guess, what, Rhia? I'm sad, and sick, too. I truly wish it hadn't come to this. Any alternative that accomplished the objective of holding Saddam to the promises he made in 1991 would have been better.

The problem is that there are no such alternatives. The inspection process had broken down. What limited success it had came only because there were 300,000 troops at his borders, and if we had backed down from that, he would have gone back to delaying and hiding and lying. (As if he ever stopped.)

He's already used weapons he wasn't supposed to have, and told the world he didn't have in his December declaration, in this conflict. He lied. Why should we believe he wasn't lying about other things? He's been reported to have issued chemical weapons to his troops, something else he wasn't supposed to have and claimed he didn't have. While I believe that using them would be about the stupidest thing he could possibly do, I also don't believe that his using them is outside the realm of possibility. If he does, I doubt people will realize we've been right all along.

While you're praying for people's safety, why not pray for the safety of the troops, too? Oh, that's right, they're instruments of an eeeeeevil American policy. They must not be worth praying for.

Were you praying for the safety of the Iraqi people while Saddam and his sons were indiscriminately raping, torturing, and killing them as a matter of government policy? I wasn't (because I don't pray), but I was concerned about them long before this war.

We won't go for the big guns first (if, by that, you mean the use of weapons of mass destruction), but if Iraq does, you darned well better believe that the US will retaliate. It has been long-established US policy that any use of any weapon of mass destruction on US troops will be answered in kind - and since that same long-established policy considers chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons to be equivalent, that means that we will use a nuke in reply. What else would you have us do? The US military is prohibited by law from having any chemical or biological weapons, so our choice in what to respond with is limited.

I didn't want this war. I still don't. However, I see no other way to terminate the threat that Saddam Hussein represents to his own people and the world.
Subscribe

  • Someone should print this poster

    In case you can't read it, it says: VINDICATION: When the loudest critic of your policies achieves his greatest success because of them. (hat…

  • Took him long enough...

    So, President Obama finally released his birth certificate. Now we can put the matter to rest. Personally, I've always thought that whether he was…

  • Fun fact for the day

    1337% of pi is 42.

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 11 comments

  • Someone should print this poster

    In case you can't read it, it says: VINDICATION: When the loudest critic of your policies achieves his greatest success because of them. (hat…

  • Took him long enough...

    So, President Obama finally released his birth certificate. Now we can put the matter to rest. Personally, I've always thought that whether he was…

  • Fun fact for the day

    1337% of pi is 42.