The following editorial was published on bPublic.com on March 26, 2003. A Moral Case for War Writer and philosopher Ayn Rand defined “the moral” as that which is beneficial to Man’s life, and therefore, is good. Consequently, “the immoral” is that which is destructive to Man’s life, and therefore, is evil. The United States’ war against Iraq fits precisely into the definition of what is morally justified. In fact, our “unilateralist” approach to the war is both moral and practical The United Nations, on the other hand, fits the definition of what is immoral. The U.N. is made up of many nations whose only goal is either the destruction of the United States (i.e, Iran and Iraq) or its loss of superpower status (i.e, France, Germany, and Russia). The U.N. is given credence every time our President or Secretary of State addresses the Security Council and makes a case for why we should be allowed to defend ourselves. The United States does not need the sanction of dictatorships like China. In addition, there is very strong evidence that several Security Council members have been supplying Iraq with weapons (Russia), infrastructure (China), and chemical components (France) – in violation of U.N. sanctions. It has been argued that going through the U.N. would allow us to gather world support. However, the last six months have seen the following: -France withdrew support for a U.N. resolution that it co-authored. -Turkey denied the U.S. access to staging grounds for a northern front that would have shortened the war (and reduced U.S. casualties). -Brutal weather conditions are now raging in the region. -Iraq has had time to prepare. It has also been argued that by acting unilaterally, we will increase world hostility toward America. However, by not being afraid to aggressively defend our interests, we show the nations of the world that we are strong. Strength and commitment to principle are what build respect in the world, not capitulation (which is why Israel still exists). In addition, those who hate America for its values of individualism and capitalism can only be appeased if those values are surrendered. Since this is not an option, we must make these savages realize that their jihad can never succeed and that they must forever cower in their caves. The United States is the only nation in the history of the world that was founded on the radical philosophy of individual rights. By contrast, the U.N. was founded on the idea that a majority vote can prevent a nation from preemptively defending itself against destruction. Iraq is not a sovereign nation. Any state that has no respect for the rights of its citizens has no right to exist. But make no mistake, our primary purpose for attacking Iraq should not be to free the Iraqi people (though that will be an excellent consequence). Our primary goal should be entirely selfish: The prevention of the proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction to those who hate us, as well as preventing the harboring of terrorists who train to detonate those weapons (or to fly airplanes into buildings). Going to excruciating lengths to avoid civilian casualties will only result in the deaths of more American troops. While we should not indiscriminately target civilian areas, there is no moral equivalence between the lives of an Iraqi citizen and a U.S. soldier. The war with Iraq has demonstrated that what is moral is also practical: The forces of a nation allowed to prosper through technology and freedom is soundly defeating the forces of a nation that cannot create its own technological advances and must staff its army with slaves who surrender at the first sign of conflict because they do not have the desire to die for a dictatorship. In addition, since the war started, popular support in both Britain and Australia has more than doubled. This shows what happens when leaders act on principle and not on the whims of a majority. Once we are victorious, merely installing democracy in Iraq will not solve its problems. Pure democracy is the ability of one group to violate the rights of another (which is why America is a constitutional republic). What is needed is the rule of law. These laws must be premised on the same philosophy as America’s founding: The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing less will do.