Declare War on Iraq Addendum

There certainly seems to be some movement in congress to debate what to do about Iraq, although it is not a declaration of war debate. I would note that we did in fact invade Panama in 1989 to get rid of a leader, so going after Saddam would not be the first time as Senator Biden asserts. Nor should Senator Levin's comfort with deterrence dictate whether we should attack Iraq. Saddam Hussein has used chemical weapons repeatedly and his restraint says more about whether he thinks he can get away with it more than any moral qualms. The Iranians are lucky that Iraq did not possess nuclear weapons during their war in the 1980s. Even in 1991, the speed of our advance may have had a lot to do with Iraq's failure to use chemicals rather than the deterrent value of our threats to possibly use nukes in retaliation.

The urge to consider the "complexity " of the issue is, on the face of it, reasonable. In practice, it is merely condescending and an excuse for inaction. Thank God we didn't have deep thinkers urging us to consider the complexity of aiding Soviet Russia in their fight against the Nazis. Talk about "blowback." We defeated National Socialism in Germany only to aid Communism enter the heart of Europe. Maybe we should have had more complex thought patterns in World War II. By all means, debate what we should do. Reasonable people can disagree with methods and even the overall question of whether to do anything active at all. But spare me the superiority of your "complexity" versus my "simple-minded" certainty. Robert Kagan manages to discuss the need to consider the complexity without looking down his nose at the non-French trained intellectuals.

Of this I am certain: If Saddam could get away killing thousands of Americans, perhaps by slipping a weapon to others to use so he can deny responsibility, he will do so. If a nuclear device goes off in one of our ports and we do not have radar tracks showing it being launched from Iraq, what would we do? Survival is not Saddam Hussein's number one goal. Grandeur is his goal. Making Iraq great is his number one objective, with history remembering him as the architect of that glory. America stands in his way and we are a target. He even expects us to attack and with that attitude, we would be foolish to avoid conflict. Take him down before he gets the big opportunity that he craves. He will show no mercy if we give him the chance. Neither should we. Debate the need to wage war. Debate the form of the war. Debate what we do after the war. Do all that. Then take him down