50% of Saudi Arabia's population is under the age of 18, and thus directly under the influence of their militant Wahhabi religious leaders who see in them, a large pool of disgruntled, economically hopeless, recruits who are not happy with the Royal family and their running of the economy. And pissing them off more is supposed to solve the problem? Of couse not.
2.) Iraq is largely a secular society, run by a despotic and totalitarian ruling clan (Saddam's family in Tikrit). Thus, this society could form the basis, if properly nurtured and supported, for a semi-democratic Arab state that could directly oppose the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia (preservation of balance of power in region). But that dictates a regime change and economic development. The Afghanistan solution isn't. There is still turmoil there and signs that alqaeda is recruiting at levels close to pre 9/11. The new regime isn't working. And I am reminded of this quote from "The Road to Babylon" by Lewis Lapham "It is senseless to go against people who, even if conquered, could not be controlled, while failure would leave us much worse off than we were before we made the attempt. ."
3.) These steps provide the possibility of weakening the economic power (oil) the Saudi regime holds over western economies. We'll now have "locked up" a ready second supplier of oil to the west which will diminish SA's ability to hold us "hostage" to economic blackmail via oil Oh, please there's plenty of oil in North and South America for us not to have to rely on Saudi Oil. We could go to Canada or Venezuela or some other source. And instead of driving gas guzzling SUVs, people could be driving hybrids and driving less. And I don't buy that "gee, we're so much safer in an SUV" They'd be safer in a Sherman tank, too, but it's just not feasible and with the supposed Arab oil blackmail over us, maybe we should all get together and boycott Arab oil.
5.) Arafat, seeing that his primary supporters are quickly being neutralized/eliminated by the US actions, will either be forced to resign by Palestinian moderates, or will have to drastically alter his strategy for obtaining a Palestinian state. Relative to the issue we're discussing...war with Iraq, I believe your number 5 is a non sequitur.
No 6.) Can't reply to this.
7. In order for the US and international community to effectively implement what I feel is a necessary "Marshall plan" for the middle east, there must be stability and liberalization in the societies at large, even if imposed from outside. Money currently being provided for economic assistance is merely being diverted to corrupt rulers who extort the West for even more money. And by what miracle will corruption end? We have it in this country as well. I don't know about Mexico's Fox, but prior presidentes used their position to line their pockets. IMO Bush and company are trying to do the same thing in this country.
8) ....should Saddam obtain nuclear weapons..... Hawk, I was watching CSPAN last week, and this weapons expert from the Carnegie Institute was speaking about just that possibility which he stated is very remote. The technology exists to track such things and find them if they exist. Saddam isn't going to attempt that. He'd be found out in a heartbeat if he did.
And THAT's why I do know this is right. There is no good reason to wage a war against Iraq. They are contained. They are not a threat, they have capitulated, cooperated and done everything they can to avoid war. Who has been killing UN workers...? That's right. Israelis. |
