Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: FaultLine who started this subject	4/2/2002 3:29:33 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (3) of 281500

Just finished reading Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece on Iraq in The New Yorker. In my judgment it's an essential piece to take into account when thinking about Iraq. It's important enough to find a copy somewhere--a relative, your library, a neighbor. Unfortunately, it's not online. At least I failed to find it. There are four arguments in the piece unevenly substantiated but all worth reflecting about. 1. The Iraqi government used chemical/biological weapons against the Kurds in 1988. This argument has been around but not nearly as widely known as it should be. Goldberg tells the story with great drama. Very painful. Coupled with the chapter on Iraq in Samantha Powers' book, the argument is overwhelming. Whatever else you may think about any plans the US may have for Iraq, this has to be a part of one's thinking. 2. There are ties between the Iraqi government and Al-Qaida. His evidence for this is the stories told by prisoners of the Kurds. This is also powerful stuff but not as credible as the first point. It needs further substantiation. My reluctance has to do with the incentive the Kurds have for bringing these stories forward--they wish to see the US get rid of Saddam; and the incentives the prisoners have to go along with whatever the Kurds asked them to say. Having said that, there does appear to be at least a kernel of truth. Whether more, I can't say. 3. That the present Iraqi government will soon have nuclear capability. We've all seen this argument advanced rather often. I have no way to assess the quality of the evidence advanced. 4. That the use of chemical-biological weapons against the Kurds was a training exercise for the real target: Israel. Little strong evidence is advanced here. It could be true; just can't tell. Oh, yes, there is one more assertion without much evidence. Goldberg claims that Saddam has taken on the trappings of fundamentalist Islam in the last several years. If true, that's significant. As I recall, the Baath party was secular; but the constellation of power has shifted. So, much to think about. I'm curious what others who've read it think about it. John

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next