The US, The UN and Iraq

It's been quite a while, Perception, and much has happened in the Israel/Palestine situation to exacerbate tensions. I don't know anyone who knows anything about the area who doesn't say that there has been a tremendous growth in sub-national "terrorist" groups -- groups which have unlimited funding and political support. We're not up against a single monster (like us!) but many, many, very widely spread small groups. According to Ahmad Rashid, the Taliban leadership are mostly back within the borders of Afghanistan and already creating real trouble.

I worked for a time in the early '80's with a former CIA officer. The CIA was convinced then that the most dangerous future threat to the US would not come from a single superpower like the Soviet Union but from sub-national groups in many countries resenting our hegemony. Bingo.

Should have provided a link as background to my post, above. For the interview with Rashid yesterday, go to NPR > Fresh Air > audio for 2/12 program.

Tartarin

Seems to me that "Your friend in the CIA" didn't tell the rest of his friends in the CIA-----other wise 9/11 might not have happened --BINGO

perception: yeppers it was Hart/Rudman that tried to tell everyone, unfortunately no one was interested.

Dys

Ah yes----On those rare occasions when someone, in our well stuffed chambers of Congress, has a good idea it gets incinerated by all the hot air.

ah Perception: "Actually, Hart-Rudman did gain impressive backing in Congress from the top Republican members of the national security set, at a time when they controlled the Senate, and vigorous support from Donald Rumsfeld at Defense. Hearings were scheduled for the week of May 7. But the White House stymied the move. It did not want Congress out front on the issue, not least with a report originated by a Democratic president and an ousted Republican speaker. On May 5, the administration announced that, rather than adopting Hart-Rudman, it was forming its own committee headed by Vice President Dick Cheney, who was expected to report in October. "The administration actually slowed down response to Hart-Rudman when momentum was building in the spring," says Gingrich.

Dys

LOL--you set a mean ambush))))))

<This could well be a case in which the Anti-War crowd guarantees the start of a war.>

Oh, for God's sake...

dys: Another result of Gingrich's "Contract on America."

He was just a kid, a recruit, who got out and went on to other work, Perception. I am grateful for what I learned from him. But you raise something important. Of course they knew. However, they can't act within the US. The FBI can. If you go back and look at the relationship and at how the FBI decided to deal with information, you'll see part of the problem -- a large part. The rest of it has to do with the fact that our government has ALWAYS made political decisions based not on intelligence (in either meaning of the word!) but on what information is "important". Clearly, if you find something threatening to us which is also embarrassing to an ally -- such as a dissident subnational group in their country -- you kinda put off dealing with it for diplomatic and often market reasons, don't you!

...this just in...
Experts Confirm New Iraq Missile Exceeds U.N. Limit
Thu Feb 13, 9:04 AM ET
By JULIA PRESTON with ERIC SCHMITT The New York Times
UNITED NATIONS (news - web sites), Feb. 12 A panel of arms experts convened by United Nations weapons inspectors has confirmed that a missile Iraq has developed exceeds range limits set by the Security Council.

The panel's conclusion will add fuel to the United States' argument that Iraq is defying Security Council disarmament resolutions, and it is likely to deepen the discord here over whether to go to war against Iraq or allow inspections to continue, as several critical Council nations insist. Read more...

This anti war guy is out to stop it not start it. I no longer care about the pro war arguments. Time to put a screeching halt.

The UN is going to get its chance to act, one way or the other, over the next five days. Saddam has that much time left to jump ship. Tick tock.

I'm with you, Edgar. I think we need to associate war-as-failure with the Bush administration.

I tend to think it a bad thing when someone decides they no longer need to consider alternate points of view or facts that might dissuade them from a chosen point of view.

tres, Precisely. However, I'm sure many anti-war people will not change their minds even if the UN inspectors find more evidence that Saddam has his stockpile of WMDs. c.i.

Agreed.

Take a look at the article I quoted above. Is there any question in anyone's mind that this does not constitute yet one more "smoking gun" in Saddam's arsenal? There is no question that Saddam has broken UN resolutions. There is no question that he has developed WOMDs as defined in those resolutions. Those claiming they needed proof have that proof; not from the US, but the UN.

I believe this is why you have gradually seen more people stating loss of civilian life as their reason for not wanting to attack Iraq. Everyone realized we would have a smoking gun sooner or later.

Of course, there's still the nagging question of whether not attacking is the best way to safeguard the most civilian lives, but I have had no success in engaging the anti-war people (as you called them) in that debate.

TW wrote

"Of course, there's still the nagging question of whether not attacking is the best way to safeguard the most civilian lives, but I have had no success in engaging the anti-war people (as you called them) in that debate".

Yes I see exactly where you are coming from TW. The question of killing or not killing civilians is clearly a tricky issue. There are people here who could justify killing say 10,000 but not 100,000. Or should we just sacrifice a nominal amount? Yes its certainly a difficult one, one that must keep good people awake at night. Still it has to be done does it not, for the greater good?

Actually I have an idea. Why not ask the people of Iraq how many of them would like to be killed for that greater good?

I see what you mean, tres.

Half mill sounds about right; but 5 0r 6 mill does not sound too large - hmmmmmmmmm!