I wrote the following to a friend who wrote an editorial in favor of the war in Iraq:
My main objections:
- The main arguments against going to war in Iraq is not that Iraq would never have been a threat (there are potentially many threats out there) -- the argument is that it was a huge and dangerous distraction from a very real threat: al-Qaeda. If al-Qaeda attacks us again, should we attack another country that might someday be a threat, or should we attack al-Qaeda? We should have put 120 thousand troops in Afghanistan, instead of Iraq. We let bin Laden go.
- Your argument about this not being a war for oil by saying that we haven't invaded Venezuela would be more persuasive if the US hadn't been involved in a coup in Venezuela during the Bush administration.
Google on this:
United States coup venezuela
We may yet accomplish good things in Iraq. But if al-Qaeda succeeds in another major attack against the US, that will be the price.
Oh, and there's also the additional problem that Iraq has become a huge propaganda machine for anti-Americanism. Al-Qaeda is terrifically happy that we've invaded Iraq. Numerous reports have said that we're losing the war on terror, because we're not attacking the problem at its source, but instead focusing on a distraction.