Liberalism = -(Conservatism)

In my continuing struggle against fickleness, I am sorely bothered by the reversal of the liberal agenda in the course of the decade. In David O. Russell's 1999 film "Three Kings" he lays out the inadequacy of the American response to the first gulf War. A band of three rogue US soldiers led by Maj. Archie Gates (George Clooney) set out to abscond with Iraqi gold in the fog surrounding the American invasion. The soldiers set out to steal the gold, ignore the insurgent's (told to rise against Saddam by Bush I) and return without incident. After witnessing the wasteful slaughter of innocent Iraqis the soldiers are impelled to aid their cause and move this village of insurgent's across the boarder to Iran.

The message of the movie is clear, America let Saddam's opponents down in the wake of the first invasion. The US promised to topple Saddam, but instead left these poor people to be butchered by the state.

It seems to me that, irrespective of the false pretenses for war, the US had a moral obligation not only to topple Saddam's evil regime, but to aid in the reconstruction effort in Iraq. How the US could morally justify leaving these people in the midst of violent political turmoil is beyond me. The analogy to Vietnam is not fair. We are not trying to protect one nation from another in Iraq, rather here we are attempting to revitalize a failed state*. I don't understand why my fellow liberals don't agree, besides for a loathing to be the the same side of any issue with Bush II.

* Whether Iraq should be split into two or three separate nations is a good question, which I do not boast to have an answer to.