1. worrying thing is the level of debate.
People focus on 3000 people dying in twin towers or 10-20,000 civilians dead in iraq. These numbers are statistically insignificant when in other parts of the world 8000 ignored people die each hour. The level of debate should be about the precendents it sets.
If saves 100s of millions of lives in the future it's OK. If it causes them it shouldn't
Today the main issue is to end it safely and securely.
100s of millions who could die in a catastrophic event or long term conflict really huge attack or world war or be saved by avoiding them.
If you believe that you can use violence to stop greater violence. So the Iraq war can be justified, but the PR has been dreadful.
It's not worth talking about ,because in reality the number of dead is very small. insignificant 97.5 % of deaths in Iraq are caused by things not connected to the war, accidents, poor dietry customs, alcohol, cigarettes etc
innocent civilians ? 0.7 million people die in Iraq every year in an Iraqi cemetery 2.5 graves out of each 100 will be war dead under Sadam there would have been at least the same number of extra dead
The only reason for discussing it is because it can be said to set a bad example. I can use force if I don't like you.
Worst thing is not the war but the lack of a coherent justification cos it could encourage other wars. Have you saved more lives than lost.
An explanation can easily be made
We are saving more lives because ..... The plan in the long run.
1. Leaving him in power, letting him ignore UN mandates etc was setting a bad example. By setting this example the message is clear to every other power play by the rules or you won't rule at all.
contradicted by Israel, Russia, China, Morocco all breaking UN motions and occupying land which doesn't belong to them. (neither the UK nor US are in breach of any UN motions at the moment)
1. the crazy dictator was killing a lot of his own people. So hopefully with a new government will not do this so 1000s of lives will be saved every year.
2. A democratic government will now make needless wars like the one against Iran 100,000s of lives will be saved.
3. WMD We are not sure there were WMDAs, but with Sadam in power we could never be sure a democratic government will obey UN regs re weapons so the risk of millions dying ended.
4. Terrorist Base It can be argued that a Sadam government could have helped territorist kill millions.
We offered Sadam a way out, but he said "no", so we had to use force.
If had gone into Rwanda would have saved lives, Kuwait before Gulf War, Yugoslavia earlier countless other wars ignored by the media.