Thinking Out Loud About Iraq

-While I don't agree that Iraq was the first place we should have gone to fight terrorism, I do know that they were further down the list somewhere; the United States was going to have to deal with Saddam eventually. The part that aggreviates me is that the leftist media still has to lie about small, irrelevant issues, just to chip away even more at the current presidential administration. These include such instances as Dan Rather's blatant lie about President Bush's military service, the riots over the flushing of the Koran which didn't happen afterall but still resulted in 15 deaths and dozens of injuries, and the recent doctored photos; when will it stop? Why do liberals keep doing this? At this point in the game they should just ride the wave home; they already have enough Bush hating bandwagon supporters to probably succeed in 2008 without lifting another finger. That's the scariest aspect of this whole ordeal; the diametrical mindset that Americans may get from disliking Bush. The "logic" behind this way of thinking is that "Well since Bush did such a shitty job, the only way to rectify his mistakes and shortcomings is to put the candidate that is the exact opposite of him into office." This is the most disturbing part of all: Hillary Clinton being thrown into the presidential running because of how convenient it is to join the bandwagon and disapprove of anything that President Bush says or does.

-While we're on the topic of Iraq, I was having a conversation about the Iraqi war with who - I thought at the time - was at least semi-intelligent. I was proven incorrect. The basis of her opposition on the war in Iraq was that the "people" are against it. This has many faults. One being that it is an argument founded out of the ad populum fallacy, being that just because 51% of the population (or group) believes in something, in turn, proves its truthfulness, or in this case, "proves" the invalidity of the war. This can be summed up in a quote by Johann von Schiller quote, where he said that "The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." Another fact that needs to be stressed is that the "people" do not know what they want. The "people" have a very long track record of making very poor decisions in the political arena. Keep in mind that the "people" voted themselves into nazism, which led to the systematic extermination of over 10 million people; not to mention the hyper-inflation period in Weimar Germany where it took close to a trillion dollars to buy one load of bread. These are just a few of the infinite reasons why America is a democratic republic; because democratically if the "people" were put in charge of everything, we'd end up as the mirror images of such abysmal failures that haven't been seen since the likes of East Germany and Stalin's USSR.

-Another contradictory point that liberals (I'm in college so I have to deal with them on a constant basis) try to press is that instead of fighting in Iraq, we should be freeing the innocent people in Darfur. With this statement alone it can be said that the people who advocate this action plan for America obviously value the people of Darfur more so than the Kurds, which were oppressed by Saddam on, possibly, an even more severe level than the people of Darfur. Are the Kurds worth less than the "Darfurians"? Another question that I will dare any liberal to answer, is this: "If the Iraqi war was for oil, why is the price of gas higher than it was three years ago when the war first began?"