I'll be very happy to post, particularly when it's all over. I'm sure even liberals like Zinni and Hackworth (both more attuned to my liberal beliefs than say, Weazel) will be happy too. Hopefully that will be some time before 2010, with minimal casualties, economic costs and with the bright shining light of regional stability which is the main focus for the war and has been since the current Iraqi policy was being developed by Bush's senior advisors back in the 1990s. Of course, the families of the war dead will be none too happy, particularly if the war, as sold, doesn't live up to the press releases.
[edit: I absolutely hope for the best. Hussein is in breach, hard to really argue the point, so the action is technically justified. However, I think the whole end-game scenario is a bit of a coin flip, and by going it alone (largely, in the important ways) we have the most to gain but also the most to lose if the long term perspective falls short.
I also do not believe the war is being fought for the main reason being used to sell it - a direct threat to US cities from Hussein's WMD. However, in the future this might be an issue as leverage against the US over Hussein's actions in the Middle East (though Israel, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are by far more obvious targets). Nor does his cruelty seem to be all that important, since there will be no Nurmeburg if he just decides to leave with his millions. This typical "selling" irritates me the most, frankly. Same old same old, only on this issue people are going to die and be killed in our names.
Frankly, I can see the potential need for action based on the white papers developed by current senior Bush staffers like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz back in the 1990s. A friendly Iraq would act as a counter to a shaky Saudi Arabia and stabilize the world energy markets to a greater extent. However, this strikes me as a bit too much like our "creation" of Panama or the justification for the Spanish American War for me to be comfortable. What's more, people who think the worst, that it is greed motivated, cannot be dismissed either. Just as France will be a big loser, there is no question that the supporters will be major winners where production and infrastructure issues are concerned. IMO the greed aspect isn't enough to motivate, but there are people close to the administration who will reap these "ancillary" benefits.
And again, we have to see if this will be a short war (likely) and short occupation, and not a decade long Beruit-like occupation with continual terrorist attacks. Hopefully, once the Iraqis get a taste of a Big Mac and see Baywatch reruns on the dish Democracy will stick like glue and serve as a shining example throughout the region. I really hope for the best.]
Charon
