Preezy wrote:No it's not. It's just saying that the decision will be shown to be correct. Nothing about forgiveness or passes at all, that's your bias clouding things.
But the decision will not be shown to be correct because it was the wrong decision. That's not my bias, that's the way it is.
Look at the way Churchill's memory is increasingly being tarnished by the horrors of Dresden. That's a man that literally defeated the Nazis and people still think he was a war criminal. If your reputation is tarnished when you beat Hitler, Blair stands no strawberry floating chance for beating Saddam.
Preezy wrote:It was a bad way of going about it, but it was justifiable in the sense that Saddam is now dead and the people of Iraq no longer live under his regime.
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of dead. Tell that to their relatives. Tell that to the people living under ISIS.
Saddam being dead/deposed was a good thing. The way it was done was not. It is not justifiable to kill hundreds of thousands to get rid of one man.
Preezy wrote:But yeah, that's a good analogy and I don't disagree with you, but my point remains. It was the lesser of two evils. To quote our good friend Edmund Burke - “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
It wasn't the lesser of two evils. There was more than one option and a lot of the other options wouldn't have resulted in so many people dying and wouldn't have resulted in the instability that we still see in the region (let alone inspiring hatred and terrorism elsewhere).
You could argue (quite successfully) that neither Blair or Bush are good men, but they did defeat an evil psychopathic dictator. Sounds cold to say, but the end justified the means.
And some people would say Saddam being a brutal dictator was fine because he kept people in line and that end justified the means.
Killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people is not justified just because a dictator is deposed. There are far better ways of doing it, indeed you agree with one of the alternatives (assassination) and so the ends couldn’t justify the means as those ends didn’t need to die.