I agree, in part, with what the Economist pointed out. However, I differ a bit on the implications of an Iraqian war versus a North Korean war. How so?
Moving militarily into Iraq could fan the hot flames all throughout the MidEast, most of which fires glow harshly upon Israel. A conflict in Iraq could inspire Arab nations to move militarily upon Israel. Remember, we're not knocking the Iraqis out of Kuwait--we're taking over the entire nation of Iraq, sorta like what Iraq did to Kuwait.
Yes, the spillover into South Korea is a real and possible threat and could, if utter failure prevails, involve a potential use of nuclear weapons, a very convenient tool when a national leader who has such technology becomes desperate. But also yes is the possiblity that the MidEast could flare into a larger conflict than a simple U.S.-British vs. Iraq event.
Regarding the breaching of U.N. resolutions, one has to also consider that Israel has been in such violation. This fact invariably could complicate and perhaps aggrevate potential widening of a MidEast conflict, started by a war with Iraq. And I think the leaders of most MidEastern nations hold this position.
I think it's also interesting to note, as some may have forgotten, that the U.S., under Republican administrations, has had a checkered past relative to the United Nations whether it be from withholding money; pulling out of UNESCO or getting booted from the UN Human Rights Commission.
nald.ca
globalpolicy.org
Heck. Our nation doesn't even like the world court:
news.bbc.co.uk |
