This question might sound rhetorical, but it's not..

[wtf]

Since Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, no connection to al qaeda, and no weapons of mass destruction, what exactly do people who support the war point to to justify it?

[prodigal_green]

1. Why, all the happy free Iraqis of course

Haven't you been watching Faux?

[hippiegranny]

2. saddam was such a bad man

that we needed to liberate 10,000 iraqis from their lives.

[unblock]

3. are you supporting the evil saddam madman?

the world is better off now that they have american-style democracy and peace and prosperity. saddam would have irradiated all our unborn babies given half a chance. you're a traitor for giving support and comfort to the enemy and disagreeing with the commander-in-chief while we're at war.

did i miss anything?

[not systems]

4. Bringin' freedom to our little brown brothers and...

white man burden and stuff like that.

Some just want to "kick their ass and take their gas"
but keep it quite in public and talk a big game about
democracy and freedom.

[wtf]

5. That's what I assumed, but..

aren't people on the right against this kind of stuff? nation building ect, things of that vein..I guess I'm being partially sarcastic, but in all honestly, I don't quite understand their position..

[Jacobin]

10. I'm not sure anyone understands their position

It doesn't seem to be based on rational thought or deduction, but mantras that are repeated so often they sound "convincing"

BTW, I think a lot of the "support" is people wanting to think they are somehow "supporting the troops" who got sent over there without their input. They had no choice. I find this somewhat hollow, since "supporting the troops" has been morphed into "supporting the invasion" by the RW.

[phantom power]

6. white man's burden

One argument is that we had to put our foot down and "bring them to their senses". That we could no longer allow non-democratic societies to flourish with WMDs.

You need to understand that these people still believe that Hussein had WMDs, and that we just haven't found them yet. They also believe that he dealt with Al Qaeda.

When Clarke came out of the closet, one of my best friends called him "a little bug of a man". His theory was that Clarke is essentially suffering from a massive case of sour grapes.

Their entire set of axioms is different than ours, and includes the belief that anybody who criticizes the president or the war in Iraq is either suffering from sour grapes, or is an apologist for terrorism.

[MsUnderstood]

8. I think the correct answer is

"Iraq is a very unstable country in a very unstable environment" Isn't that what Condi Rice said on 60 minutes when justifying the war?

[kainah]

13. Yes, e j e, that's definitely a subtle one

I find that not many people will actually articulate that one as bluntly as they might in casual conversation with friends, but the discussion usually reveals those sentiments.

And, yes, most of the pro-war kids who stop to talk with us (so many of them are, tragically, "cannon-fodder age," too) have their own paradigm and one of the interesting pieces of it is that they expect us to be stupid flag-bashing, soldier-hating, frothing crazies. We really surprise them when they discover that we're very smart, we have WAY more facts than they do, we understand why we believe what we believe, we're not adverse to arguing our points, we have an answer for all of their talking points, and HOLY SHIT -- usually at least 50% of us are VETERANS!!!!

It's very interesting to watch their attitudes change.

[kainah]

7. I table every week at the University of Wyoming

for our peace group and the answers that I hear most often to that question are these:

1) But the Iraqi people are free now;
2) Saddam was an evil tyrant, he butchered thousands (or millions) of people;
3) But we didn't know then that there were no WMD, no connection to AQ, etc;
4) Everyone else thought he had WMD, too; and,
5) We don't want them striking us here.

[arcane1]

9. because you're "with us or against us"

thinking is for traitors and terrorists, please cease from doing any more of it

:silly:

[Miss Authoritiva]

11. Saddam, evildoer (maybe even the anti-Christ)

Plus as an extra bonus: rape rooms, rape rooms, rape rooms.

Your question is humbly brilliant, and brilliantly humble. My theory: some people psychologically invest themselves to such a great extent into identifying with particular celebrities, politicians, athletes/teams, and, yes, presidents and their pet wars that to disassociate themselves from the object of fetishism when rude reality smacks them in the face just requires too much effort. It's just easier to, ah, stay the course.

[librechik]

12. Zelikow, the head of the 9/11 commission said it was to protect Israel

I have to agree

[rucky]

14. War on Islam

we can't really say it, but too many Americans see the world in black & white.

Or brown & white in this case.