Originally Posted by Jmick
Ozmar, I'd like you to explain the "legal and moral" agrument you have for the invasion of Iraq.
OK, briefly:
Legal: Saddam invaded Kuwait. We kicked him out. He signed an armistice that said, among other things, that he would comply with UN weapons inspectors and respect a no-fly zone over the northern third of Iraq. Over the next 12 years, he systematically violated UN resolutions, even kicking inspectors out of his country in the late 90's. His troops often shot at our planes which were enforcing the no-fly zone. (Even one such incident was sufficient legal grounding to justify a renewal of our conflict against them. The Clinton administration, however, neglected to pursue this option.) Ultimately, a final UN resolution that designated military consequences should Saddam fail to comply was sought and obtained by our government, and we chose to enforce that resolution. Finally, our US Congress (the only legal authorization we need - we don't actually need to respect "international law" except insofar as we do need to comply with legally ratified treaties) authorized our government to use military force to remove the Saddam regime.
We had many legal justifications for this so-called "illegal" war.
Moral: Saddam was a vicious and brutal tyrant who gassed his own people, institutionalized the ---- of one's family members for political prisoners, cut off hands, fed people into shredders and terrorized his people. He starved them while bleeding money off of humanitarian efforts to help the people of his country. He was a sworn enemy of our country, vowing to defeat us at every opportunity, and he had ordered an unsuccessful assassination attempt on one of our leaders. He continually sought to obtain more chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and there is little doubt that he would be pleased to pass such weapons to terrorists who would try to use them in the US. After 9/11, and after he evicted weapons inspectors, there was credible reason to fear this possibility.
For humanitarian concerns for the Iraqi people, and for fear of protecting American citizens, there were strong moral reasons to seek the removal of the Saddam regime.
I am not a legal scholar or a professional philosopher or ethicist. I am, however, a citizen of a free country, and I think it is therefore my responsibility to consider these things. I would encourage us all to do so.
Ozmar the Citizen