Rallion's Journal: Supposed American Superiority

I find it necessary to ask this question, as an American. It's something I've been wondering about a lot lately.

Why is it that Iraq is a dangerous country that needs to be disarmed, while America is somehow a morally superior police force? America has far more military power than Iraq, clearly, and makes no secret of its arsenal of WMDs. (Which, though it's unrelated to my question, in reality, I often see Americans advocating the indiscrimate use of.)

People may say that Iraq was unstable. That Saddam was unstable, that he would use his might without thought to justice or rationality. However, I see America the same way. This war is certainly not a rational one. Arguably, it does more to increase the threat to America (by inciting potential terrorists) than it does to reduce it (by eliminating a relatively minor source of funding). If there is any net gain in security (unlikely), a far more effective use of $200 billion could have been found. It was a reckless attack, as well, due to the lack of concern for international support. And, depending on which Iraqi civilians you ask, it was not particularly just, either, as it attempts to force American values on another culture.

In summary, the attack on Iraq was reckless, irrational, unilateral and possibly unjust. Oh, and let's not forget the torture of Iraqis who disagreed with our side. And our weapons program, which, in terms of production, research, and stockpile, dwarfs that of Iraq.

So where does the moral authority come from? How is the U.S. oh-so-superior? Is it the secular government that our current president would rather do without? Is it our freedom, which the government seems to be taking the first steps toward stripping away?

I love America, I do, but I'm starting to fear that classics like Fahrenheit 451 may have been all too prophetic -- a nation full of people who almost think their country is the only one on the planet, and their only reminder of the existence of the rest of the world is the fact that they're constantly at war with it.

I know that the current administration might disapprove of this post, as a question that the Republican party has not approved should never be asked. But I decided long ago to always be a patriot instead of blindly doing what the government tells me.

If anybody is offended, I offer my apologies for simply and peacefully expressing my concerns, as any person who loves their country would.

I got two reasons:

[eglamkowski]

WWI
WWII

When the US isn't involved and let's countries do what they want, they go start world wars.

Countries that won't be responsible will have responsibility force on them. Since we did that forcing twice before, we are the de facto country to do it into the future.

At least for as long as our own government is responsible, anyways. At some point that will cease to be true and it will fall to someone else, but probably not for a few centuries. I mean, do you REALLY want Russia or China policing the wo

Re:I got two reasons:

[Rallion]

There's no reason to think Iraq was ready to start a world war, that hasn't even been suggested by anybody credible. What has been suggested is that the US agression in the Middle East (and possible elsewhere in the near future?) does have the potential to spawn such a massive conflict.

Iraq cannot be compared to Germany and allies in WW1/WW2. Germany was taking over a continent, Iraqs were...not doing much. In fact, it seems to me that overall, Iraq was being increasingly responsible. Less atrocities commi