, I think Zonder is deflecting attention from the obvious, to anyone on this planet, criminal atrocities of Saddam.
Not really.
My point is that while Saddam has been known to brutally treat its own population, killing them in massive numbers in certain occasions, this is obviously not THE REASON for the proposed invasion of Iraq, because:
(1) They were just as well known 10 years ago when the earlier Bush left him in place
(2) Other US allies committing equally "atrocious" acts (Turkey, Pakistan...)
(3) There are other nations perishing in worse conditions of civil war, hunger, and disease, and I don't see Bush shedding a tear to liberate them from their misery
(4) US knew of the "atrocious" acts and still continued to supply Iraq with technological know-how to manufacture more WMDs:
cooperativeresearch.org
So, I ask, why is the US so hell-bent on invading Iraq now?
The answer is:
(1) Probably not the soi-disant and rather elusive WMDs because:
.....(a) Nobody can find any trace of them in Iraq
.....(b) Bush says he has proof but won't show (!) and anyway can't even direct the inspectors to where they might find some
.....(c) There are quite a few CONFIRMED holders of serious WMDs, some of whom are nasty characters like Pakistan and North Korea, but they are not being aggressed like Iraq is.
(2) Probably not a pathological obsession a la "He tried to kill my DADDY!", for I believe we can safely assume that anyone who rises to Presidency will not be so twisted as to have such an incident cloud his judgement.
What other possible reason remains?
(3) Very probably OIL:
.....(a) Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world
.....(b) Iraq's reserves are also near the surface and hence low-cost
.....(c) US is in dire need of oil, as its own production is nowhere near its consumption
.....(d) Bush and EVERYONE on his administration are oil people
.....(e) Bush has been heavily supported by US oil corporations in his elections
(4) Possibly geo-political influence:
.....(a) Always good to get a foothold
.....(b) Will help protect Israel better
Anyway, I hope that helps see how I came to decide it must be for the oil that Bush is dying to invade Iraq.
Perhaps Zonder, or others, will give reasons why Saddam won't comply with his inspection agreement
Iraq has given unhindered access to each and every site inspectors wanted to go. This, in my humble opinion, suggests that they HAVE complied with the inspections.
I suppose you say the above because Blix said he "feels" that "Iraq has not genuinely accepted disarmement". Oh OK then, if he feels they have not "genuinely" accepted disarmement, we should bomb them to kingdom come, men, women and children :)
Still, inspectors have found niente - nothing material, no isotopes in the water, air, or soil. No sign whatsoever that something might be hidden away upon understanding that the inspectors would arrive.
Now this can mean one of three things:
(1) Iraq really does not have any WMDs - No reason to invade.
(2) Iraq has a few WMDs, which he has not used in the past ten years - No reason to invade, since he does not appear hostile, and hence is in no different position than the dozen other countries who possess WMDs.
And if Iraq does have some WMDs hidden away, re why Iraq might be reluctant about showing its hand to the inspectors at this time:
(1) Probably not because Saddam is a pathological liar and a psycho - just like with Bush, I will forego the explanations of "because he is MAD!" which are all too simple but tend to be false, as leaders tend to have reasons for things they do.
(2) Probably not because Saddam wants to sell them to terrorist organizations - There was ample opportunity to do so in the period 1991-2001, and he has not done so.
(Besides, as the sarine gas attack in Tokyo subway showed, terrorists have no need for Saddam to come up with WMDs)
(3) Probably not because Saddam wants to use them against the US or a neighbour - He has not done so yet, which is a good enough indication for me that he will not do so in the future.
(4) Probably because he feels there is a VERY REAL THREAT to his country in the form of an IMMINENT INVASION from the only superpower of the world (Duh!).
and why the UN doesn't mean what it says.
I would love to explain to the best of my understanding, if you only clarify this question a bit. Where do you feel the UN "doesn't mean what it says"? |
