Replies

Regarding Michaels' comment that Ms. Kneisler’s Iraq death toll site "... makes no attempt to predict how many thousands of Iraqi’s would have been killed under Saddam, had he been allowed to continue in power..." Please do put a site together with that information. I would like to see those stats. I'm afraid those numbers would be far lower than the number of Iraqi civilians killed in the US-led war. If you include the number of Iraqi civilians who've been victims of suicide car bombs and kidnappings (which did not occur before the liberation), the number of casualties and the amount of human suffering triggered by the US presence is even greater.

Saddam was actually pretty well contained during the months leading up to war. The weapons inspections were working- if not finding any WMD they were preventing new projects from being launched. Sometimes constructive change takes time, and forcing it too quickly does more harm than good. Regime change occurred in Russia and South Africa without military intervention.

The massacre of the Kurds in '91 is often presented out of context. Those people, encouraged by the US during the Gulf war, rose up and fought Saddam. We were not there to help them when Saddam retaliated. Yes it was a terrible thing, but please put it in the proper perspective - in the context of war.

Iraq is in chaos - the new government is in jeopardy. The infrastructure is in shambles. Skilled professionals are leaving the country in droves because of the kidnapping threat, leaving the only unskilled to rebuild. Our actions have inspired more hate than love in the Arab world, actually worsening the threat of terrorism. The action in Iraq was botched and was not at all in line with the true principals of Conservatism.

Yes, I'll probably get kicked off the forum for saying these things. I only wish that we could have a rational dialog instead of all the name calling that is the standard these days.