This is a roll-forward of a post in a thread (below). Originally in response to Matt Burly. I have been silent here as of late because I am really disturbed with the ad-hoc shift in tone. We went from "doing this because of our right to self-defense" to " we are fighting a war of liberation". This is absurd BS that should not float here no more than "Planet X" and "Time-Space Trances", and below is why I make this claim.

Begin response to Matt B:

". But even when coalition soldiers are extremely careful, it's an inevitable outcome due to the very dangerous conditions created by the terror tactics employed by Saddam's hard core followers."

The point is we shouldn't be there at all. Its not like the people we are killing in the process of removing Saddam ASKED us to remove Saddam. They simply don't want us there. They did not agree to die so that they didn't have to suffer Saddam. WE CAN NOT MAKE THAT CHOICE FOR THEM!

Throwing off tyranny must be done by the oppressed! Thats what revolution is, an act by those ruled who refuse the rule of their masters. Pure and simple. If we walk in, like we are, and start shooting up their civilization (or whats left of it) to change out their ruler, we are speaking for them without their consent, are ruling over them, are removing their freedom and CANNOT call it liberation. To do so is a bald lie born from optimistic self-delusion.

If they had asked us, invited us, pleaded with us to do this- as europe did in the pre-amble of our entry into WWII, then we would be justified.

But they have not. Even in Umm Quasar- the only town we have firmly in our grip, there is not common euphoria that the 'allies' are there. There is grudging acceptance. In other cities we are seeing suicide bombings, demonstrations... Even as we give them food they chant pro-Saddam slogans. Only the kurds in the north have joined us in ferreting out Saddam loyalists. Only the kurds in the north have taken up arms against Baghdad.

The Shi'a in the south are welcoming, as we speak here, death squads from Iran to fight the American/British occupation.

If the Dictator in Baghdad had attacked us first, as Germany and Japan had, then we would be RIGHT in our actions here, under clear self defense. It would be CORRECT to install a peaceful government in the place of our enemy so that they would never fight us again (Japan, Germany). But even then, in those cases, it was not liberation but justifiable action in service of national survival. We liberated our allies and pacified our enemies, the 'freedom' Japan and germany now enjoy was a kind gift by our Nation, a remarkable one in fact- but it was not the justification for our war.

But, as I have argued in the past- with Fact, reference and reason, this is not a justified war. But place this aside- as no warmonger (mean that definitionally, not ad hominem) was willing to sway from the path based on reason and fact. In fact, more than place it aside- assume I was dead wrong in all my arguments, the central question still stands- is this really a war of liberation?

I say it is not, can not be by its very nature. Our original justifications for doing this were in terms of pre-emptive self defense. Now, here we talk about liberation? While we slay people who NEVER ASKED US to 'free' them? How can we call it freedom when WE choose who rules them, how they live, where they get their food from.

I challenge all the old pro-war folks to stand by their guns. I dare you all to hold true to your position that this was a war for our pre-emptive self interest. I dare you all because you can't claim that this war is justified simply because we are NOT saddam. We cant kill (n - m) people and justify it because someone else kills (n) people. Its a black lie.

Its terribly ignorant and arrogant that we appoint ourselfs final judge on who the world can be ruled by REGARDLESS OF THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WHICH IS AGAINST OUR ARROGATION! Its not our role. It is tyranny. It is oppression, and we will pay with a thousand suicide bombers if we prance around the world with this thesis in mind.

Davin