So, these activities outrage you more [morally] than do the actions of Saddam?
Two points...first, what has Saddam done lately that you know of that the world should take exception to...I mean, we keep provoking this guy and he will do something. But the truth is that he has gone from being our SOB to our enemy without ever directly attacking us. Second, what makes you think that his presumed deeds can't be contained. Evidence is on my side that they can. If Bush has had a victory here, it is in the fact that his strongarm tactics have produced a more compliant Iraq. I can easily translate that into leverage to a peaceful Iraq for years to come.
We paused a war on the basis of Iraq's commitment to disarm.
You want to play word games with me again...I am looking for a peaceful solution that requires a little give and take on both sides.
It is a CLEAR threat.
We can chose to see a threat in many places we consider friendly today, and could be mortal enemies tomorrow.
The entire concept of diplomacy is based on a man's word being good.
Was our word good when we incited the Kurds to raise against him, and then abandoned them to their fate? I am not trying to get you to call me a traitor again...just hope to make you see things in shades rather than the BW way you typically see.
As pointed out previously, we cannot maintain a "forceful display" indefinitely. We're in the region now,
If we win we have to be prepared to be in the region for years to come or the country will slip into anarchy (and it may well despite our presence), so clearly it is just a different mission, but we are there to stay.
we need to solve this problem once and for all, free these people, elminate the threat, and be done with it.
I hope we get a sober administration before all this doomsday happens.
Al |
