Middle East

The Pulse: Iraq Reconsidered

In retrospect, was it a just invasion or not?

Every other month, CT will ask editors on our masthead, along with selected evangelical leaders, about current events within our movement and the broader culture—and then publish the best of their comments.

Q: Should the U.S. have gotten involved militarily in Iraq in 2003?

50% Yes

  • Martin Luther compares the warrior's craft with that of a surgeon cutting off a limb in order to save the body. Seen that way, the U.S. was right getting involved in Iraq.

  • I was in favor of military action. At the same time, I am appalled at our lack of adequate preparation for the occupation and change in government.

  • Given the conditions and the support for the cause in the country at the time, I think the President and the Congress made a reasonable move in entering Iraq.

  • It was universally believed that Saddam Hussein had been developing WMDs. Hussein was in breach of a series of U.N. resolutions and a threat to neighbors and the U.S. alike.

50% No

  • Going into Iraq had little to do with the war on terror. It had to do with protecting our oil interests in the Middle East.

Subscriber access only You have reached the end of this Article Preview
To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.
Already a CT subscriber?
or your full digital access.
July/August
Subscribe to CT and get one year free.

Read These Next

hide this
Access The Archives

In the Archives

This article is available to CT subscribers only. To continue reading, please subscribe. You'll get immediate access to this article and the entire Christianity Today archives.

Subscribe

Already a subscriber?
or to continue reading.