Iraq and Justification

Sorry to come back to politics, but I think this needs to be addressed. I admit I was wrong. According to what I've heard about the last report on the Ba'athist weapons programs, there were no weapons. There were some kind of weapons programs, but they were nowhere near to being a threat as long as the sanctions regime remained in place. If the sanctions were removed, Saddam Hussein wished to reacquire WMD, but even then they were to a be deterrent against Iran. So, why the deception? To keep outsiders guessing is my guess. The possible existence of a WMD arsenal gave Iraq leverage on its own.

So where does justification come in? Well, clearly the WMD argument was not justified. Nevertheless, what's done is done, and really the argument about whether it was justified or not, legal or not, is moot. What would knowing whether it was legal or justified actually change on the ground? Nothing. In any case, one must consider whether the sanctions regime could have continued indefinately. I doubt it. Iraq was close to getting them removed thanks to its influence with France, Germany and Russia, all of whom stood to gain valuable oil concessions if the sanctions ended. So, with 20/20 hindsight, I believe I can say that the war was unjustified and there could have been a peaceful solution to the WMD issue. Unfortunately the obstinacy of the American administration and that of the Ba'athist government made this impossible.

This brings me back to my initial justification for the war (that is clearly wrong given the current chaos on the ground) , which was that it made is possible to bring down the sanctions without giving in to Saddam Hussein. Clearly the sanctions, while successful at preventing the return of Iraq's WMD programs, were too harmful for Iraqi citizens. Furthermore, the war could be justified (somewhat) along the lines that Iraq was continually breaking the terms of the treaty they signed at the end of the first war. Lastly, the war allowed the removal of a nasty dictator (though arguably the present chaos is not an improvement). In my opinion, this was a good thing.

So, think what you may. I can admit I was wrong about WMD, but I still think the war didn't have a wholly bad outcome. There was justification on some level. In any case, it's all moot because whether it was justified or not is totally irrelevant to present circumstances.

R

So, will I make a decent manager some day?

Well, if my performance as president of the debating society is any example, the answer is maybe. In past, when no one was willing to help organise it, I did everything. As a result, not a lot got done because I was either too busy, insufficiently skilled or unmotivated. So, this semester is different. I've got a bunch of eager go-getters who volunteered to help. (Mwa ha ha, they know not to what they have committed themselves!) So, I've done an okay job of divesting myself of onerous responsibility by delegating certain tasks. I'm not sure just how clear it is to the executive members. I know if I were in their position, I would want it clearly spelled out what my responsibilities were. I have left the responsibilities deliberately vague in case I need to saddle some of them with extra work. Still, I must resist the urge to micromanage and hope that people know what to do.

So what am I doing? Well, I gave myself mainly the responsibility of liaising with group outside the debating society and the university. This is something I know I can do well. The responsibilities I least fancied in past were preparing advertisements and promoting the club at Clubs Days. (It's really bad if you're the only one organising your table.) I also didn't like being responsible for building a website (I can't do html, though I could probaly learn.) or having to go beg for funding from others like a pariah. So, I delegated all these tasks. I think on some level, I'm really concerned about looking like I'm doing a lot for the club and fulfilling my duties. Appearance counts more than substance. Fortunately, I can't make it appear like I'm being a good president without actually doing some work.

So, getting back to the main question... will I make a good manager? Well, I still lack some important qualities such as: time management skills, networking skills (though I do better if I have a pint in my hand) and sometimes initiave. I can be way too cautious. I guess experience has taught me that caution usually serves me better. Nevertheless, I miss far too many opportunities, and I guess I regret it. I still don't have good time management habits. I never write things down and go by my memory instead. As a result, certain small things invariably end up incomplete. I guess the aforementioned list suggests things I can work on. I haven't set out a strategy for doing these things though... and that reminds me that I would like to review my goals, something I keep putting off.

Cheers!
R