War coverage and opinions haven't been seen on this blog, conspicuous by their absence, I suppose. I am frequently asked what I think of the war, but I haven't really made up my mind. I have strong opinions on the war, and I note some good reasons to oppose the war, but the central question in determining my opinion is whether it is of long term benefit to the US to prosecute this war. Will we be safer? Will world trade be more secure in the long term, enough to offset the cost of the war? I can't answer those questions, and those are the most important questions to my mind.
I can say I would be more likely to favor the war if this administration wasn't the one in charge of it. The Bush administration has demonstrated a tin ear toward civil rights, to put it charitably. I can say with conviction the war will not be worth a long term loss of personal freedom in this country.
I can also say the war is justified, that is, the Iraqi regime is one of the most brutal on the planet, and they deserve nothing better than to be crushed quickly and completely. Now that the war is underway, I watch the news like most everyone else, cheering our troops. I'm convinced the cost of the war to innocent Iraqi citizens will not be as great as the cost of another decade or more of rule under the Husseins.
I have to say, as one whose opinions are ambivalent toward the war, that the anti-war movement is its own worse enemy. I cringe every time I see another 'No Blood for Oil' sign, or worse, that widely circulated banner asking for 'Peace in Our Time.' Or, in two words, Michael Moore.
These protesters, however, take the cake. A banner that says, 'We are ready to fight, world peace is our right!' ??? And, yes, they do mean fight with violence. You can't make this stuff up. For a little sanity from the anti-war side I visit Jim Henley, or a handful of other libertarian bloggers. Sadly, those people are few and far between.