Bad Reasons to be Against the War

Living in Philadelphia and running in the circles I run in, I'm often
in the minority when it comes to political issues. The war in Iraq is
a big one. While I wouldn't consider myself a hawk, I supported the
war from the beginning and continue to do so.

I don't begrudge the views of those who are on the other side of this
debate. In many regards, I wish I was on that side, too; war is a
terrible thing, and only the sickest people welcome it gladly. I also
understand, respect, and in some cases agree with the positions that
people against the war have. I also have a lot of problems with some
of the things that are said by those who are not against the war.

What concerns me, though, is bad reasons to be against the war. In my
opinion, here are some bad reasons to be against the war:

• "War is always wrong." People who believe this say things like, "I
prefer peace," "why can't we just all get along," and "using force
isn't the Christian thing to do." But peace sometimes isn't an
immediately available option, geopolitics are more complicated than
just world leaders solving their problems over warm milk and cookies,
and there are plenty of godly uses of force in the Bible. This
doesn't mean war is automatically right, but it also doesn't mean it's
automatically wrong.

• "We shouldn't mess in other peoples' business." People who believe
this are uneasy with America throwing its power around in other
places, or think the billions we've spent in the Middle East are
irresponsible given the problems we face on our doorstep. I for one
believe that with economic might and political power comes a moral
responsibility to be involved, and that closing ranks and focusing
solely on our own problems is awfully small-minded in a world that is
so politically and economically interconnected. Again, this doesn't
mean waging an expensive war outside our borders is automatically
right, but it also doesn't mean it's automatically wrong.

• "Bush lied, we now know it, so we should pull out now." Now we're
getting somewhere. Was W disingenuous in convincing the American
people to go to war? Perhaps. Impeachment-worthy? I'll listen. But
pull out immediately? That makes no sense. People who have been
against this war from the beginning have increased their vehemence
that the right thing to do is to get out of Iraq ASAP. But that's a
false choice. Back then, we had to decide whether or not to go to
war. Now that we're in it, the choice isn't between staying in it or
traveling back three years in time and never going to war in the first
place. Have people who advocate a full and immediate withdrawal of
troops thought through the consequences of what that would happen
next? Any time you're faced with a fork in the road and you choose
one path and decide later that you should've chosen the other path,
you can't at that point choose that other path, because you're not at
that fork anymore. Now I'm not saying that you should throw good
money after bad, but nor do I think it's fair to say that the better
alternative to continuing to fight is to pull out and imagine that the
last three years didn't happen.

Again, I respect the anti-war position and the people who advocate it.
I just don't like any permutation of the following three reasons,
because I think they're short-sighted and wrong.