Why the Iraq War can be Justified

“Tonight, we are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom. Our grief has turned to anger and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done” said President Bush after the horrific actions on September 11th 2001.
Whatever comments and digs people have made in the direction of the former President, the above comment sums up the Iraq war more than President Bush realised. Recently we saw Prime Minister Blair give his statement at the Queen Elizabeth II court where he robustly justified his decision on joining America in liberating Iraq from the dictatorship and tyranny of Saddam Hussein. As the 2010 elections approach, the labour party is still scarred with waging two wars whilst in power and unfortunately they are still going on. Iraq has seen over 100,000 of its citizens fall and British troops have lost 250 soldiers in Afghanistan. I’m not sure why these numbers should be shocking but at the end of it, it was a war.
During the reign of Saddam Hussein, the rest of the world had this fear of Saddam built up by Europe and North America. Their allegations were that he had weapons of mass destruction and within forty-five minutes, Saddam could destroy countries as far as Turkey. Whilst this intelligence was later nullified with no weapons of such ability found at all, the public world immediately came to the conclusion that this war was illegal. However, the reasons for going into war was never that Saddam actually possessed these weapons but rather that Saddam had the ability to attain these weapons. From this, one would immediately say, why stop a buyer instead of a seller. Well, most likely these so called weapons would be traced back to the Americans and well, they don’t want to reveal that.
Yes Saddam had no link to Al-Qaeda and yes Saddam had nothing to do with the events of September 11th but that is not why they invaded Iraq. They invaded Afghanistan for this, and next is Pakistan and Yemen to find this “axis of evil” Osama bin Laden (who comes from one of the richest construction families in the Arabia). September 11th did not cause the west to invade Iraq but rather moved the spotlight onto this region and they soon realised what this dictator was doing and was planning to do and this is why the Iraq war can be justified.
Saddam was a tyrant, he deserved to be taken down. I spent two weeks in Iraq over the Christmas holidays and every single Iraqi was thankful that democracy had been brought to Iraq and they had been liberated from his evil hold over a great country. Not only were the Iraqis relieved but Saddam had enemies such as Iran, Lebanon, Turkey and Syria to name a few, who were all more than happy to see his death on YouTube.
If things had stayed as they were and Europe and America had not taken space in the Middle-East, a huge weapons trade would be going on amongst the black market and then perhaps the nearby countries would be suffering more than they are now. In fact, I feel these surrounding countries should be thankful to the invading nations after freeing them from such a disease that spoiled the image of the Middle-East.
So when analyzing President Bush’s comments stated above, justice was delivered to the Iraqi people and to the whole of that nation. Yes, America still consider the Middle-East as the enemies and will never allow them to grow and thrive like the west has, however, I am thankful to the liberators because I can now travel and see the countries in that region for the beauty they truly hold rather than travel in fear of this indecent human being.

Nobody doubts that Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, a bad man, and one who committed many crimes upon his own peoples as well as others.
Any war ‘can’ be justified pretty much.
The debate about the Iraq war is not whether Iraq is a better or worst place, or whether Saddam was a good or bad man, it is about the lies, deception and hypocrisy of it.
Whilst i can understand the premise of your post, and to a certain extent think it may be designed to provoke a debate, i think the core principles here are all wrong. Is Iraq really a democracy? A country where a Kurd was stated as its leader, a minority man in charge? I country where there is widespread civil unrest? Has the middle-east really been saved from a ‘threat’. Can you seriously travel to the middle-east without any sense of fear or worry?
Iraq is a place free of a dictator, i am not certain it is a place of peace and happiness, or a place with promise.
Justice can only be dealt with honesty and trust, and this war has none of it. For sure, some aspects may have been beneficial, and if those were outlined at the very beggining then the publics loss of faith may have not been so severe, but at the end of the day, whether the war is justified or not, and whether we are better without Saddam or not, are two very different issues.
Well written. I was one of those who was fiercely opposed to the war before it began; but having travelled there afterwards and seen the country slowly getting better, i guess i was partly wrong. however, is hundreds of thousands of deaths a price worth paying for freedom from saddam’s tyranny? i’m not sure either way.
I agree a well written article. Another point we have to see especially for us shias are that if we had not gone to war in Iraq would millions of us have been able to go and visit the shrines that are out there. And being there my self and asking individuals i agree with what the article says that life was definitely better for the Iraqis after the war then before.