1 of 3

Write now Article Tools

There is little moral difference between Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and America's invasion of Iraq. Both were pre-emptive, since there were no real provocations or danger avoided or ended by the invasions. Both involved head strong rulers wanting to exert their will on our countries. Both were accomplished quickly and lead to violent occupations. Saddam's move on Kuwait was clearly for the purpose of expanding Iraqi territory and oil reserves, while the motives of the American move on Iraq continue to be debated and remain complex and opaque, since the original rationales have been proven to have been non-sensical and false.

Given that conditions in Iraq have deteriorated since the American invasion, it can safely be assumed that the best interests of the Iraqis were not at the top of the American list of priorities in entering Iraq. America has not brought forward a viable alternative to Saddan or ushered forth prosperity, freedom or just democracy. Since the invasion of Kuwait was short-lived, while the American invasion and occupation of Iraq continues after 5 years, the American action is more morally troubling on the global stage.

Everyone knew that Saddam's power grab in Kuwait in 1991 was self-serving and the Kuwaitis went from having what amounts to a hereditary monarchy to being ruled by a military dictator from Badgdad and returning. On the other hand, the Iraqis had a ruthless and efficient autocrat replaced by anarchy and chaos. Clearly, America had ulterior motives in invading Iraq. Many suspect that Dabuya wanted to pay Saddam back for trying to assassinate his father, ex-President George H.W. Bush. Given relentless advocating of the invasion by Israel, many believe that responding to Israel was a big factor in our invasion of Iraq. Indeed, no WMDs were ever found in Iraq, supporting the UN inspectors claims that there were none. A Saddam connection to al-Qaeda and 9-11 were shown to be false, yet US officials made such claims for years. This deception/fabrication have undermined America's moral authority.

Although denying terrorists a safehaven has played prominently in neo-con rhetoric, the activities of terrorists in and from Iraq have grown remarkably since the US invasion and American troops have allowed al-Qaeda and others to control major swaths of Iraq, even close to the vaunted Green Zone, for long periods. For years, our troops cleared an area and then left, due to lack of manpower to hold the ground, so insurgents just returned quickly.

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Iraqi invasion of Kuwait vs. American invasion of Iraq: What is the moral difference??
We want to hear your view. Write now!