If you'd like to print out this page, click the Print button above. Alternatively, you may click the printer icon on your browser's toolbar, or choose File>Print from the menu.     The Double-Edged Sword of Freedom :: It’s All About Money…Or Is It? :: Do the Ends Justify the Means?   Do the Ends Justify the Means? One of the most controversial aspects about the proposed military action against Iraq was its purpose. Some viewed the elimination of the threat of the development of weapons of mass destruction as the only legitimate objective for war against Iraq. Others saw the ouster of Saddam Hussein as a legitimate goal. Some argued that a commitment to the principles of international law must be the paramount concern. Still others contended that there was no greater objective than the stability of the region and the safety of millions of people. Is it legitimate for liberal democracies to pursue military action against other nations to try and make these nations adopt the principles of liberal democracies? Should nations be able to unseat the leader of another nation, no matter how dangerous and despicable he might be? Can liberal democracies take actions that may violate international law to achieve results that are beneficial to these liberal democracies? Is that what is happening in the case of military action against Iraq? Do you regard this as hypocrisy on the part of liberal democracies? Do you believe that it is a bad idea for the United States to take military action against Iraq without a clear mandate of support from its allies, or was Senator Stevens correct when he said that it was enough that the U.S. had "might and right" on its side?