Wednesday, October 3, 2007

More on The Iraq Debate

Link provided by Victory Caucus to a post up at Prospect (UK) called Mission Accomplished.

  • The question of what to do in Iraq today must be separated from the decision to topple Saddam Hussein four and a half years ago. That decision is a matter for historians. By any normal ethical standard, the coalition's current project in Iraq is a just one. Britain, America and Iraq's other allies are there as the guests of an elected government given a huge mandate by Iraqi voters under a legitimate constitution. The UN approved the coalition's role in May 2003, and the mandate has been renewed annually since then, most recently this August. Meanwhile, the other side in this war are among the worst people in global politics: Baathists, the Nazis of the middle east; Sunni fundamentalists, the chief opponents of progress in Islam's struggle with modernity; and the government of Iran. Ethically, causes do not come much clearer than this one.
This is an excellent, in depth look at the current situation. Recommended reading to all. Required reading for Daughter. Well, as long as she lets me get away with that crack anyway.

* * UPDATE * *

Greyhawk over at The Mudville Gazette has an analysis of this analysis you also need to read called Mission Accomplished?
  • No - not yet.
    But I believe
    this article is the most accurate, fact-based, and level headed assessment of the situation - both current and historical - in Iraq as I've ever read.

No comments: