Should We Remove Saddam Hussein From Power?
I.Lack of support received from United Nations Leaders
A.Bush's address towards the U.N. 9/11 was viewed as unsubstantial
1.United Nations leaders voiced their belief that to an attack on Iraq would be against U.N. policy.
2.Pew pole states American public 70% against unilateral assault without foreign backing.
B.Domestically politicians voicing opposition for immediate attack
1.Don Nickles, Oklahoma Senator 2nd Republican in seniority for the Senate, is against invasion.
2.Tom Daschle, majority leader for the senate, is against preemptive strike.
II.Lack of evidence to support immediate action
A.Republicans advocating preventive action towards Iraq unable to substantiate with evidence
1.Don Nichols justification for entering Iraq based un unknown, not known.
2.President Bush using good vs. evil propaganda
III.Flawless victory over Iraq complete impossibility
A.U.S. Military faces severe causalities of war
1.Iraq will utilize urban warfare to place American soldiers at a disadvantage
B.Removing Saddam Hussein from authority will cause inevitable power vacuum leading to increased terrorist activity
1.History dictates that America will not stick around long enough to protect Iraqi innocent.
2.American interference without due cause will lead to an expansion of derision towards U.S. resulting in amplified terrorist action.
Not Simply the Lack of Tension but the Presence of Justice
"Problems can not be solved at the same level of awareness that created them." (Albert Einstein, 1879-1955) The current question of whether or not the U.S. should invade Iraq unsubstantiated and without allies can easily be answered using the aforementioned axiom. President George W. Bush, alongside supplementary antagonists, is ignoring what common sense dictates and foolishly advocating assaulting Iraq, an impoverished nation, headed by a prior to defeated dictator. Bush's assault faces a triple threat in that it must be carried out...