tepper

Issue #44

Last Update March 2, 2006

International A Reply to The Boys from Syracuse by Michael Tepper Mr. Krownstein (The Boys from Syracuse) argues that the U.S. is potentially following ancient Athens to the dust bin of history as a world power...but the basic premise of his argument has some difficulty with the facts, and I question some his of his interpretations.

Mr. Krownstein argues that the U.S. committed either illegal or unwarranted aggression in making war on Iraq, with Saddam Hussein as their leader. This is highly arguable. The U.N. found Iraq in violation of its agreements, agreements that were pertaining to the end of Gulf War 1, and regarding weapons of mass destruction. Multiple violations, all well documented. The U.N. itself gave the OK to use force against Iraq. The U.S. congress gave the President legal authority to use force against Iraq.

In truth, the U.S. has been at war with Iraq since the U.S. under President Bill Clinton, started bombing Iraq from the mid to late 1990's. The intelligence on Iraq, monitoring their internal communications, showed clearly they were still in flagrant iolation of the agreements. This was not just the U.S. intelligence, but many Western government intelligence agencies agreed that Iraq was a major threat and was trying to acquire or had acquired WMD's, included intelligence from France, Germany, Russia, Israel, and the U.K.

However, even if the truth is that Iraq no longer had weapons, Iraq itself went to great lengths to make the world believe they did. It is the U.S. Government's constitutional responsibility to defend this country from hostile and dangerous enemies, who have the capability and desire to harm us. Iraq qualified on each count. President Clinton thought so too, and dropped bombs on Iraq multiple times during the 1990's. Was Clinton lying about Iraq?

If Saddam wanted us to think he had weapons, and acted like he had weapons, I am glad that the proof wasn't in the pudding. One 9/11 is too much for most of us. As for Afghanistan, it's true the U.S. coalition has yet to capture Osama bin Laden. It often takes time to get (i.e. Hitler) enemies in war. However apparently the U.S. has decimated large amounts of the Taliban, and what was left is in retreat. Additionally, and to it's credit, the U.S. has foiled many planned attacks on U.S. and European interests since 9/11. Is Mr. Krownstein arguing the U.S.'s moral and legal right to wage war under the circumstances following the 9/11 attacks -- which I think would be well defended -- or the competence of the mission? On both accounts, it seems the facts are against him.

As to whether we could follow Athens because we are stretched to thin, I think that is an interesting question. Certainly these are legitimate issues to discuss and strategize about. But the moral and legal responsibility to defend this country against her enemies is not an option, nor a prerogative, for the President. It's his duty.