I wont deny the american goverment has made mistakes in its foreign policy (not removing Saddam in the first gulf war being one of them) but removing the bath party from Iraq was not one of them. I would have prefered the goverment just out and said "Saddam is a tyrant so were getting rid of him" but of course it didnt happen like that. It will take time but i really believe Iraq has a better future now than it did a year ago that is my justifcation for the war and i dont need the "international comunity" to agree with me.

That was less the fault of the US than the fault of the UN. A global order based on sovereignty cannot be allowed to exist since it weighs the existance of politicians over and above the existence of the people. A global order based on universal human rights is what is required

If it were as simple as to say that life will improve for the Iraqi people as a result of this action I'd jump on board, but as Dubya has said the US doesn't send troops into places where it doesn't have a national interest. Afghanistan is a place where the US did not have any national interest, it was attacked out of retribution and national security, you can expect it to get better in Afghanistan because a foreign invader has no interest in exploiting the country (what are you gonna do steal sand).

There was a German sociologist by the name of Max Weber who came up with a few models of ethics. One was the one I believe in, the ethics of ultimate ends, being that you do what is right even if it sometimes goes wrong, you learn and continue doing the right thing. The other is what most international politics is based on, the ethics of reponsibility, that you do what will produce the best results for your interests, if that sometimes has good results great if not, oh well. Iraq is an example of the latter.

Except you weren't there in the first place because of ethnical concern for the people of Iraq, but to ensure stable production of oil by the people of Kuwait who were drilling on an angle into Iraqi territory

The UN is broken, not going to hear any differing views on that from me, but the only way to fix it is unacceptable for the US. The Rome Charter remains unsigned, which would solve this whole problem

How exactly does it not?

If I understood this, I would post about it.
But I don't, so I won't.

O.O


Wow!

This thread isnt about motives of the war, it is about Saddams capture, the whole motive argument has been worn out by all sides, in truth I am tired of hearing about why or why not, on the war. So lets try to get back on topic before it becomes a flame war.

So Saddam has been captured, now what happens to him?  Where should he be tried at?  Who should try him?  What do we do to prevent retailitory actions because of his capture?  What should he be charged with?

Saddam had alot of time and advanced warning to hide or sell them off if he did infact have them.

Uhhh, that was the point remember? Saddam was simply not supposed to have them. If he didn't have them, and wasn't producing them, then there was no reason to disarm him since there was nothing to disarm him of. That was the justification for which you went to war. Pre-Emptive Strike Doctrine requires two points, one is those WMD the second is that there is an imminent threat. So far neither of those were met

Really lets stop pretending that there would be any set of circumstances or evidence that would have convinced those opposed to the war to support it.

As an opponent of the war I've given you the circumstances that would convinced me to support the war

Sure you could argue that there was support for the war in afghanistan because were attacked first but even then there were protests all of the world.

Yes but they weren't in the millions like the anti-Iraq protests. For the most part people saw Afghanistan as justified because it was a defensive war, Iraq on the other hand with its complete lack of WMD and large quantities of oil was not seen as a defensive war but as a brutal act of imperialism by a declining empire that had overstretched itself over they years and had its economy fluster

While most goverments of the world were officially supportive of that effort you still had social groups and politcal comentators from europe and the middle east calling it "petty" and "racist" so lets not pretend a good cause for the war would have gotten it support.

Notice how you said most governments. Politicians around the world are a conglomerate of liars, manipulators and thieves, i see absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be supportive when their public is not. There were only two countries that had supported the war where the polls showed INITIALLY that there was support for the war, the UK and the US.  It was both petty and racist, since I don't see the US getting involved in helping human rights in Africa these days... oh yeah I forgot the commander and chief said we can only help protect human rights in places where the US has a national interest, so those africans better start finding oil under their tundras or else they aren't going to get  any help.

I do see the good, but I am not blinded by the realities surrounding it. You got a good result out of an evil act, but don't expect the good to last that long if your initiall intentions were not

I think the whole point about the WMD was not that we couldn't prove he had them, he couldn't prove he got rid of them.  That's how it was justified to me anyway, and that's good enough.
If I was bound by treaty to dismantle my WMD, I would make damn sure I recorded it neatly to show everybody.   Or at least do a decent job of lying.
Also, the acts of aggression, like trying to shoot down American patrol planes (legal to be there as per before mentioned treaty), would make me think a war was justified.
The only question in my mind about it is why did we wait so long?
Just some rambling thoughts - not really here to participate, but just felt like saying something.
I don't think I'd argue that there wasn't any self-interest going on here though, but if the right results were acheived, I guess I don't care why it happened.