The great debate that faces our country today is whether a war with Iraq is necessary or President Bush is just trying to start a war. Clearly no one wants to get involved in a war but there are some instances where it is not avoidable. This war is avoidable for the time being, but a look into the future shows a more questionable outlook.
Feelings run deep on both sides of the debate on Iraq and both sides of the debate raise some very compelling issues that require our attention. Let me start by saying there is no possible way that the proposed war in Iraq is a war for oil. Iraq has trade agreements with many other nations in the world including France, Germany, and Russia. If the United States wanted oil from Iraq Saddam Hussein would be more than willing to trade with us. The money that we would pay Iraq for their oil would go strait into Saddam�s pocket, so he could afford to build a fifteenth palace, as apposed to paying the companies that drilled for the oil. All President Bush has to do is ask and Iraqi oil is ours for a price.
On the other hand we could get Iraqi oil for free if we take over Iraq. However this to is not plausible. The United States will stay in Iraq after the war but only as long as it is necessary to establish a new government. The US government actually has a vested interest in getting out of Iraq as soon as possible. It costs the government a half billion dollars a day to house troops in Iraq so America troops coming home soon means the government has more money to spend on the other things that they want. Further more the overthrow of Saddam Hussein would lead to American companies investing in Iraqi oil fields. It is estimated that the United States will spend 20 billion dollars to rehabilitate Iraq�s oil fields in the months after a US invasion. Oil production has also dropped since Saddam took power effectively crippling the economy of Iraq and dooming the vast majority of people to poverty.
Another factor in the debate over the war in Iraq is the idea of a preemptive strike. Although this is the first time the government has been upfront about it the United States has launched preemptive strikes in the past. After September eleventh people asked why the government had not acted against Al Qaeda. The same thing will happen if the Bush administration does nothing and Saddam Hussein attacks the United States or an Allie of ours, probably in the Middle East. No attack against the United States was made against the United States in WWI, Korea, or Vietnam, and despite the fact that the government will not admit to it the United States has invaded many countries in Central and South America including Cuba, Panama, and Columbia without provocation.
The United States has a difficult deception to make in regard to a war with Iraq. Nobody likes war and new technology would prevent as much damage as possible but it is in the world�s best interest to get Saddam Hussein out of power. Weapons of mass destruction and human rights violations along with many other injustices that Saddam Hussein has caused in Iraq pile up against him and provide a strong justification as to why Saddam has to go.
