If the USA went to war at this stage, there would be a split within the US - a massive rend that could not be repaired by this war mongering administration. That is the best that could be said. Because of the unElecteds' stand with this and admittedly other international stands our footing in the world has slid to a 50 year low. The world believes the US and Britain are the instigators. The British believe that the US is the instigator and British are lap dogs. The US has far to many citizens believing we are the instigators to go forward. And, the fact is, we are the instigators.
Imperialism, control of oil, appeasement of arms dealers and wag the dog is not a reason for war. History will not look kindly on this era of Americanization!
Craven de Kere wrote:
Please provide sources for what you said about Blix. I am very curious as to how this slipped past the news sources I read over the last few weeks.
It was in the Washington Post Friday, I think. A long article, starts on page 1.
Craven de Kere wrote:It's very true that the inspections are only happening because of the administration's position, but I also think the administration was dissappointed that Iraq accepted and were doing their best to make it so that they wouldn't accept.
I disagree. Saddam rarely outright refuses when pressed. It was expected that Saddam would accept inspections then thwart them in various ways. The Bush administration is keeping the pressure on Saddam so that he will comply. They know he has the weapons and is in a box: He gives them up and risks a rebellion by displaying such weakness or he denies he has them and the US takes him down. Bush is thinking a couple steps beyond Saddam.
Tantor
I digress (don't have time to finish this discussion now) but:
Tantor's profile wrote: After years of experience and reading I can say conclusively that the Air Force is the best managed organization in the history of the world.
I hope so, I am going to try to join.
In my opinion this is not about Iraq, Saddam, or Al Queda. It is about Cheny, Rumsfield, and the first President Bush wanting to avenge their failures and soothe ruffled feathers. Remember it was Cheny who refused to send air support for our troops in the Battle of Mogadishu. It was fear of a real war that they could not stomach and now with the help of Osama they have been able to recreate the scenario and again will rely on technology to win the battle for them.
Afghanistan is not yet secure, we the people are not yet secure, the world is vulnerable and these guys want to spend 80 billion dollars to avenge their own egos. These old men do not care about us, to quote President John F. Kennedy, "Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind.
John F. Kennedy," Speech to UN General Assembly, Sept. 25, 1961.
The inspections may indeed lead to a unilateral effort to disarm Iraq. If WMD are unearthed, there's no question their will be a strong coalition to do just that. These petitions are symbolic at best so I find debating solely on what effectiveness they may have leads to some pissing in the wind.
The administration's backing of their financial appointees for two years and no change in their financial policies can be construed as a blueprint for their foreign policies. So when do the head start falling there? How many more scapegoats to try and prove that nothing is their fault? It's those damn underlings we hired. Will this transfer over to their foreign policy? We've gone from a hands off policy with no desire to nation building to nearly the exact opposite in two years.
Blix's mistakes in inspection policy in the past that can be given as examples don't necessarily apply under the new UN mandates which the administration demanded be passed. New technology and the new UN resolution are pretty powerful tools to find WMD. I simply can't believe that if there is covert intelligence on the possession of these weapons that they have no idea of where they might be and aren't going to clue in the inspectors in some way. This "it might let the cat out of the bag" can only me a smokescreen as far as I'm concerned.
I see Tom Sawyer loaning out some more of that classic whitewash but not to the inspectors.
Call the White House comment line at 1-202-456-1111
and let 'em know what you think.
As LW suggests, the attacks on Blix can be easily imagined as a PR move to discredit the UN inspection process if it doesn't produce some desired result or finding. I gather the main charge is that he missed finding the nuke program during the last series of inspections. But then, so did US and Israeli (and other) intelligence communities - or they didn't bother to pass on that intelligence.
Joanne...one point I'd argue against in what you've written is the notion that Bush senior's ego is a part of this equation. That's not possible to know, of course, but it seems to me that Brent Scocroft's speech of two months ago (I understand Bush senior is closer to Scocroft than to anyone in the present administration) suggests the father is in a more temperate crowd.
blatham and Joanne, I think it may be more how history is reporting the action of old 41 than the ego. Ego is one of 43's biggest inadequacies - not 41!
Bill W
I am not, believe me, a fan of very many of B the younger's ideas or policies, but my view of the man has changed from after reading DiIliuo's letter to Suskind...
http://www.ronsuskind.com/writing/esquire/esq_rove_0103.html
Adding here that my opinion of Carl Rove has gotten far worse.
Anyone see the satellite photos of what is conjectured to be a heavy water producing plant and a plant for refining uranium? If Iraqi officials were dumb enough to produce those volumes of books and verbally deny having any WMD and nothing that would be able to produce them, they deserve the booby prize for the most colossal diplomatic mistake of the past twenty years. I don't agree that the U.S. should assume a nation building/imperialistic stance on trying to change the whole world. We can utilize the law of attrition but we can't flaunt it without getting into serious trouble. We have to have more than a military defense for where that will place us in the eyes of the world.
If you remember, Dubya's campaign speeches involving foreign policy was to approach it with humility. Humility has been replaced with a dishonest arrogance. The world changed on 9/11 but not to the point where we can bully the rest of the world into modeling their government after ours. Question: when are we going to start working on the government in Britain?
Joanne Durel,
Your assertions about the armament of our forces in Somalia are not consistent with the facts. It was Clinton's Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin who denied General Montgomery's request for armor and air support in Mogadishu (and he did so over the vocal objections of then General Colin powell, Chairman of the JCS.. President George H Bush (assisted by then Secretary of Defense Cheney) directed our initial intervention in Somalia to stabilize the political chaos and deliver humanitarian aid. Later, in the interregnum between the election and Clinton's inaugural, Somalia became subject to a UN mandated nation-building exercise. The new President Clinton subordinated the U.S. forces to this UN organization focused on creating a new government, but without the power or understanding required to tame the self interests of the 15 or so chieftains, General Aidid mot prominently among them. The whole affair lost track of its formerly clear objectives and, lost in the midst of Byzantine command relationships and the absence of clear U.S. leadership from the new administration, stumbled into the fiasco in Mogadishu to which you referred. This incident took place in late August 1993, seven months after Clinton took office.
The Somali experience provides us an excellent example of the folly of expecting decisive results from a UN operation before the fundamental power and political issues have been decisively resolved. It is a graphic illustration of the folly of "giving the inspectors a chance".
