PL -
Since I've already answered some of your points in my previous posts, I'll just say this:
I am not suggesting that we do nothing about Saddam Hussein. As far as I know, no one is suggesting that. If you can find me one quote from any liberal saying that we should just leave Hussein alone, I'll be very surprised.
When Bush said in his State of the Union address that "Trusting Saddam Hussein is not an option", he was using a very old propaganda technique. When your position is not being accepted as rational, make the other guy out to be an even bigger lunatic. Make statements that suggest that his position is even crazier than yours.
Once again, the choice is not between complete inaction and all out war. There are other alternatives, such as continuing inspections with greater specificity of deadlines, etc. We can always go to war later if it is absolutely necessary. It just isn't absolutely necessary now.
You know, only six months ago, the U.S. was enjoying an unprecedented level of support, from around the globe, for our fight against terrorism. Yet today, we are becoming more and more isolated. Even the British may not support our action in Iraq.
Don't you think that if our arguments for war were truly compelling that more people around the world would believe them? Even the Arab countries didn't give us a hard time about going into Afghanistan, but now we can't even get Cameroon to go along with us!
- Allen |
