Home | Society
The war on terror may be the single most divisive issue facing us today. Most people either strongly support it or are totally against it. And opinions are strong both ways. What are we fighting for? Are we winning? Should we continue the fight? Why do have thousands of soldiers in the Middle East? When terrorists flew two commercial planes into the World Trade Center, the public strongly supported an air raid on Afghanistan which was a safe harbor for terrorists. Not many had even heard of the Taliban before then. Not so straightforward is the fighting in Iraq. We were led to believe Iraq had a stockpile of dangerous weapons of mass destruction? We still haven't found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Were the September 11 terrorist attacks funded by Saddam? Maybe yes, maybe no. But do you think there was wild celebration at the palace in Baghdad the day terrorist flew two planes full of passengers into the World Trade Center? No doubt about that. What Saddam did do is thumb his nose at the United Nations and flip his middle finger at the world. Without question, Saddam was a defiant and ruthless dictator who killed his own people. When the United Nations imposed sanctions against Iraq, it was the citizens that suffered, not Saddam. And sometimes when you play with fire, you get burned. From a common sense perspective, what conclusion would you reach? Could you reach any conclusion other than that Iraq was being less than truthful? Saddam was told point blank that if he continued to play games, Baghdad would be obliterated. And he sat there and did nothing. Big mistake on his part. Considering where he is now, do you think he would do things differently if he could? Look at all the progress we've made in fighting terror so far: 1. The ruthless tyrant Saddam Hussein has been deposed, tried in court, and sentenced to death. 2. Weapons of mass destruction have been removed from the arsenal of terrorist dictator Moammar Qaddaffi. He knew he was next and played it smarter than Saddam. The bombing of Pan Am flight 103 was just one of the myriad of terrorist acts carried out or funded by Qaddaffi over several decades. How many lives has this saved? 3. Al-Qaeda has suffered heavy losses including its second in command, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was taken out when his secret hideaway was bombed. Can Al-Qaeda's leaders really orchestrate its terrorist activities effectively when their primary concern is for their own survuval? 4. The Taliban has been decimated and Afghanistan is no longer the safe harbor for terrorists it once was. 5. In the 5 years since 9/11/2001, not one major terrorist act has been successful on American soil. The critical point is the last one. There is no way of knowing how many terrorist acts have been thwarted and how many lives have been saved due to our proactive stance in the war against terror. Clearly we have made significant progress in preventing terror from affecting our everyday lives. And with thousands of lives lost, the price has been high. Have these lives been lost in vain? Is the best course of action to stop fighting the war on terror in Irag and bring our soldiers home? Will myopic, isolationist policies such as this be as effective at preventing terror as our current course of action? Will we ever learn from the past? Will we make the same mistakes over and over? Why was World War II fought? Because World War I ended prematurely with unfinished business. A ruthless tyrant was appeased, not defeated. Troops were withdrawn and we were lulled into a false sense of security. And less than a generation later, the world was at war again. And if you've ever been to Normandy, you know many lives were lost by not finishing what we started in Word War I. We frequently talk of making the world a safer place for generations that follow. Are we serious about that? Or are just saying that because it sounds good? Will we complete the task at hand? Or will we take the easy route and leave the dirty work for our children? Withdrawing from Iraq may save lives today, but it's still a short-term solution to a long-term challenge. If we ignore it now, it's not going to go away. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away. It only makes it worse. Enron is a classic example from the world of business. For years Enron ignored long-term problems in favor or short-term solutions. They cooked the books to fool investors into a false sense of security and eventually everyone involved got slaughtered, financially in this case. It won't be financially in the war on terror, real lives will be lost. Difficult decisions that affect future generations must be made today. Like the old adage says, you can't have your cake and eat it too. War is ugly and unfortunately sometimes necessary. Considering all the success we've had so far, it would be catastrophic to future generations to retreat and allow the enemy to regroup. War is ugly now but it will be uglier if we shirk our responsibility and leave the mess for our children to deal with.
Article Source: http://www.approvedarticles.com
Please Rate this Article
5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5
Not yet Rated
