NationStates Jolt Archive


Search for Iraqi MWDs called off - there aren't any and never were any

Tactical Grace
13-01-2005, 03:46
No need to furnish a reference, load up BBC, CNN, FOX, any international news website, and you can see that the search for Iraqi MWDs has been called off and will not be resumed.

The conclusion of several different teams of experts is that there are no weapons to be found. Nor indeed, were there any weapons to be found.

And let's face it, if there was even a single Scud-B loaded with stale (and most likely ineffective) nerve gas somewhere and the insurgents looted it in the post-invasion confusion, you would think they would have fired it at something by now. But no.

So, where does this leave us? Well, the reason for the war was pretty clear, to disarm Iraq of its MWDs. It is even written down in some official UN documents, which the US and UK have used as the underpinning of their legal justification for war. The latest UN SC Resolution was even written by them. But no victim, no weapon, no crime. (Incidentally, the gassing of the Kurds does not count as that was carried out while Iraq was the US/UK's ally against Iran, with US/UK-supplied chemical agents).

Now a lot of people will say something like this ... you know what, yes the war was technically illegal, but it freed the Iraqi people from a brutal dictatorship, doesn't matter if we supported it in the past, the important thing is that a good deed has been done now, and it outweighs arguments of legitimacy, which are a trivial diversion in comparison.

A reasonable argument, in theory. However, it does nothing for me, because I honestly do not give a damn about spreading democracy. If someone put it to me in those terms right at the start, should we invade Iraq to free its people, without mentioning the MWDs, I would have said, no. Not worth the greater trouble that would result, especially the grave implications for world energy security. (LOL, where is the "liberal" stance there?) So, changing the justification after the act, while satisfactory for some, does not satisfy me. If anything, I view it as an insult to my intelligence.

The war was, and remains, illegal under international law.

Accepting its illegality, the subsequent moral justification, I consider irrelevant.

So there's my position. It is clear now that MWDs were a concensus-building tool, a non-issue in reality. Given that history is being revised to place far greater emphasis on a moral case not actually made at the time, I feel it is important for people to reassess where they stand. For me, nothing that has happened since the war has changed anything.
Von Witzleben
13-01-2005, 03:47
This must be the 3rd or 4th thread about this already.
Bodies Without Organs
13-01-2005, 03:49
Aren't the two threads on this already enough?

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=388777

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=388853
BlatantSillyness
13-01-2005, 03:50
Aren't the two threads on this already enough?

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=388777

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=388853
Dam those exmods spamming up our beloved general forum!
Tactical Grace
13-01-2005, 03:53
This thread is my opinion, and argument behind it. Had I deemed another thread suitable of posting it there, I would have done so. As things stand, I feel it merits its own.

I also do not recall merging all US Election debate into a single super-thread, while I was a moderator. ;)
CanuckHeaven
13-01-2005, 04:54
No need to furnish a reference, load up BBC, CNN, FOX, any international news website, and you can see that the search for Iraqi MWDs has been called off and will not be resumed.

The conclusion of several different teams of experts is that there are no weapons to be found. Nor indeed, were there any weapons to be found.

And let's face it, if there was even a single Scud-B loaded with stale (and most likely ineffective) nerve gas somewhere and the insurgents looted it in the post-invasion confusion, you would think they would have fired it at something by now. But no.

So, where does this leave us? Well, the reason for the war was pretty clear, to disarm Iraq of its MWDs. It is even written down in some official UN documents, which the US and UK have used as the underpinning of their legal justification for war. The latest UN SC Resolution was even written by them. But no victim, no weapon, no crime. (Incidentally, the gassing of the Kurds does not count as that was carried out while Iraq was the US/UK's ally against Iran, with US/UK-supplied chemical agents).

Now a lot of people will say something like this ... you know what, yes the war was technically illegal, but it freed the Iraqi people from a brutal dictatorship, doesn't matter if we supported it in the past, the important thing is that a good deed has been done now, and it outweighs arguments of legitimacy, which are a trivial diversion in comparison.

A reasonable argument, in theory. However, it does nothing for me, because I honestly do not give a damn about spreading democracy. If someone put it to me in those terms right at the start, should we invade Iraq to free its people, without mentioning the MWDs, I would have said, no. Not worth the greater trouble that would result, especially the grave implications for world energy security. (LOL, where is the "liberal" stance there?) So, changing the justification after the act, while satisfactory for some, does not satisfy me. If anything, I view it as an insult to my intelligence.

The war was, and remains, illegal under international law.

Accepting its illegality, the subsequent moral justification, I consider irrelevant.

So there's my position. It is clear now that MWDs were a concensus-building tool, a non-issue in reality. Given that history is being revised to place far greater emphasis on a moral case not actually made at the time, I feel it is important for people to reassess where they stand. For me, nothing that has happened since the war has changed anything.

Illegal

Immoral

Inexcusable

The I's have it!!
Afghregastan
13-01-2005, 04:59
Glad to see that there is a few people in the forum who can think critically about an emotional issue. Have any of you been massively frustrated when trying to point out the shifting justifications for the war and the obvious conclusion to be drawn from that?

It's really creepy when people, on such a large scale can't tell when they are being fed a lie.
Goed Twee
13-01-2005, 08:04
Wait...are you telling me that this is surprising people?
Armed Bookworms
13-01-2005, 08:22
True, Iraq had no Mufti Wearing Ducks. This is obvious.
Keruvalia
13-01-2005, 08:56
I also do not recall merging all US Election debate into a single super-thread, while I was a moderator. ;)

That would have been hilarious. Is it too late?
Neo-Anarchists
13-01-2005, 09:00
That would have been hilarious. Is it too late?
Yeah, the ensuing confusion would be quite a spectacle...