Iraq & A Hard Place Part 1 - 

Introduction

23, 2003 45: AM CST

I’m going to begin this series with a few predictions. On the evening of April 1, plus or minus one week, the United States is going to invade Iraq. The invasion will be authorized by the United Nations Security Council. Saudi Arabia and Turkey will grant to use their bases for the attacks. And coalition forces will defeat Iraq handily in less than one month, even if Saddam Hussein orders the use of his weapons of mass destruction.

Nobody’s going to be reeling in shock from these predictions. However, it seems that very few people understand the full depth of reasons why we will be engaging in this conflict. Regardless of which side of the debate they fall on, everybody seems to agree that President Bush has not properly explained his position to the American people or to the world. And although I have read many good articles and watched many news programs arguing either for or against an invasion, I haven’t seen a clear, complete argument, on either side, anywhere.

I will attempt to present that argument here. I will begin by dispelling several popular myths related to the impending invasion. I will follow with a chronicle of the reasons for our invasion. Then, I will analyze and refute the arguments against it. I will include a vision of what the conflict will be like – a vision that does not include many of the nightmare scenarios envisioned by some others. And I will conclude with a brief look ahead at the aftermath of the war.

If you want to read more of Russell Newquist's view on (all sorts of) things, check out his weblog, RussBlog.

This is commentary by Russell Newquist
Reprinted with permission                                                                  

MOORESTUFF.US