Oh give it a break PT.. 85% of Americans support going to war against Saddam IF we do with UN support. The 52% statistic you cite reflects those, like myself, who believe the threat is dire enough down the road, to justify doing without the support of the French or Russians, who all have a vital economic agenda in maintaining Saddam in power (so Iraq's Billions in debts/contracts to them are not canceled by a new government)..
That means 85% of Americans believe it's alright to wage war and commit all those nasty acts you so decry, so long as we have some piece of paper from the UNSC that says it's "alright"..
That's the equivalent of a bunch of policemen who all recognize a suspect has broken the law, and they will have to "raid" his home, possibly putting innocents at risk, but require some piece of paper from a supervisor so they can "cover their asses"..
That's what this is about PT.. Bush and Blair are covering their political asses with regard to taking on Saddam... Bush did it by first conceding to Powell that we needed to approach the UNSC one last time to give them a chance to do their job. They job outlined in previous UN resolutions, as well as the 15-0 vote on 1441. But they haven't done so.
But it's still "form over substance".. The substantive part of this debate is that Saddam has not abided by the requirements of the 1991 cease fire agreement.
That agreement was bilateral.. If Saddam complies, we'll lift sanctions and deal with the fact that he's just dictator content to repress his own people, and not threaten his neighbors.. (and western economies dependent upon oil)..
But Saddam has not complied. Thus, the cease fire is rendered null and void, irregardless of whether the UNSC wishes to acknowledge this fact or not.
In fact, it is because the UNSC refuses to acknowledge Saddam's violation of these binding resolutions, or to enforce them by "all necessary means" that we find ourselves with 200,000+ American and British troops waiting for the order to advance into Iraq to force compliance through regime change.
Let's revisit history for a moment PT.. Recall the Treaty of Versailles that limited Germany's military size and structure to strict limitations. Germany couldn't build tanks.. They were restricted to a 100,000 man army. They were not permitted to build battleships above a certain size, or number..
lib.byu.edu
lib.byu.edu
Now this is important because it provides a foundation from which the various UNSC resolutions have been influenced.
But unlike Versailles, where pre-Hitlerian Germany abided by its terms, Saddam has NEVER complied with his obligations under these UNSC requirements. He still remains in defiance..
But can anyone imagine the Kaiser, or Weimar republic defying the Treaty of Versailles immediately after Allied occupation forces withdrew in 1923?? Would that have not provoked an immediate enforcement of the treaty??
Forget the legalese PT.. Look at the substance.. Saddam is playing games with the UN, with the US, and with everyone else. He knows the last thing we want to do is go to war, and it's easy for him to prey on our fear of losing both human life, as well as our moral high ground.
But were the tables reversed, you can bet your ass that Saddam would be forcing us to comply by any terms his regime managed to impose upon us...
We waited for 12 years, the past 5 of which with no inspections at all. We have not received the cooperation demanded by 1441 and we're permitting ourselves to be dragged back into a 1995-98 scenario, except for the fact that US forces will not be permitted to stay in tents content to "contain" Saddam.
Now we have suffered 9/11, and found Saddam to have resumed manufacturing of prohibited long-range ballistic missiles and having lied about the number of rocket engines they imported (300+ instead of some 125 they admitted to)..
And we know from the previous inspections in 1998 that they are not able to account for 6,000 chemical warheads they originally told us they had used against Iran (but had not)..
So what more needs to be said? He has no interest in complying... He will only partially comply to the extent that it prevents the US from invading, feeding the same delusions of naive individuals like yourself that "inspections are working" that he fed to your predecessors during the '90s. And the minute he has the ability to buy or build nuclear weapons (possibly through N. Korea) he will do so and resume his goal of dominating the entire Persian Gulf with impunity (less we be willing to dare nuclear holocaust in the region)..
My opinion is shared by most people in the world, most governments in the world, virtually all religious leaders and and nobel laureates. And it certainly appears as if the United Nations Security Council shares this view too.
As for who shares your opinion, why don't you refresh yourself on the history of the "American First Committee" movement prior to WWII.. See who supported that..
spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk
As a sidenote, the AFC was dissolved 4 days after Pearl Harbor.
And with that.. I'm going to hit the sack...
Hawk |
