America Should Go to War
Colin Powell made his case not too long ago. Saddam Hussein is not in compliance with Resolution 1441. He is not disarming. Therefore, the only practical thing to do is to go to war. Yet, many people protest the impending war, suggesting that President Bush is the dangerous man while they ignore Hussein's past history. By vilifying Bush who is in fact acting as an aggressor in this conflict, many are drawn to peace protests. A student writing on this subject might want to point out that while no one wants to go to war unless it is absolutely necessarily, there has never been a better reason to engage in conflict.
This is not another Vietnam. Not only will strategy be different, but the cause is different. The likely attack will be launched to make sure the world is safe from a specific, verifiable threat.
Vietnam was about a lot of things, but predominately about communism and the illusive, unproven domino theory. This is not a war for democracy--although that is what America philosophically fights for--but a war for survival.
The toppling of the World Trade Center was the first step. Not since Pearl Harbor has the United States been so blatantly attacked. There is a link between those events and Iraq, albeit small and unproven. Still, a possible relationship is there. Further, even if 911 never happened, Saddam had never been properly dealt with during the Gulf War that occurred more than a decade ago. Since that time, there have been inspections to make sure that the leader of Iraq was in compliance with an agreement made to end that war. Although he was sort of in agreement, inspections were lax. Eight years of Clinton saw a turning away from the Middle East in...