You 'collaborate' with the imperialist occupier because you believe even the faint possibility that a secular liberal democracy may be established represents a better prospect for Iraq than anything on offer from the schism-perpetuating Jihadists, the ex-Ba'athists and the ultra-nationalists that dominate the insurgency. You didn't support the war yet you are willing to risk your own saftey by taking this chance. For this you are brutally-murdered, probably by ex-Ba'athists. In the West, those who you might have expected to defend your corner, those who wear their solidarity with the world's oppressed on their sleeves, don't say anything. Not a damn thing. Rather, they find something 'understandable' in the motivations of the fascists who cut your throat like a pig.There's more of this excellent post. Go and read it.
It was the phrase "a country that posed no threat" that got me. The leadership of said country posed a threat, "clear and present danger" and all that to the people of said country. Younge is supporting a fundamentally right-wing position that national sovereignty is sacrosanct. What goes in inside national borders is no-one's business but the country itself. That's an isolationist and fundamentally selfish attitude, like all those people who write into the Independent and Guardian saying the Iraq war has made their lives more dangerous. Well how dangerous was life for people in Iraq before the war? At risk of being taken to Abhu Ghraib and tortured, raped and made to endure any number inhuman acts? It's that attitude of my life is hunky dory and screw everyone else.
I would, though, support Younge in saying that people who start sentences with "I know it's not very PC ...?" need taking to one side and kicking. Most people who set out to challenge PC attitudes and shibboleths are not being "dangerous", they are just out and out racist bigots.