Ref - Preemptive action
The threat of Preemption Action against Cuba, was clearly justified, because the evidence of the threat was very clear and unambigous.
However the evidence of the threat posed by Iraq is based upon several presumptions, and is highly ambiguous. There is no clear cut evidence of weapons of mass destruction. However I am willing to grant that Saddam is probably cheating, and has probably cleverly hidden the banned weapons.
Even if true, the threat posed to USA by these weapons is not evident at all. Al Qaeda and Saddam are sworn enemies, and evidence of their cooperation is extremely speculative. In the past Saddam has sponsored secular terrorists. Abu Nidal a notorious terrorist sought refuge in Baghdad, but after September 11, Saddam had him "executed".
So the threat to USA requires two suppositions
A. Posession of banned weapons
B. An Iraqi alliance with Al-Qaeda.
This thought pattern is more appropriate for a lynch mob.
However the President made up his mind a long time ago, and now bloodshed is inevitable.
I can only pray that the bloodshed is minimal, and we prevail quickly.
Saddam is no angel, and he is the worst despot since Hitler or Stalin. However it is not clear if USA can quickly transplant its democratic values after an occupation of Iraq. There is no tradition of Democracy in the Middle East. Latin America and Africa also had difficulty in adopting democracy. Several cultures disdain the slow democratic process, and prefer the simplicity of a Fascist rule. Germany finally became democratic, but only after the trauma of Nazism and WWII. It is not clear where Iraq will end up.
Everyone expects a quick cheap victory like Desert Storm. However prior to the Kuwait War, USA was haunted by Ghosts of Viet Nam, and expected a long bloody drawn out campaign. However the use of Airpower and High Tech Weaponry gave USA an overwhelming edge during Desert Storm. Everyone expects a repeat of Desert Storm, Kosovo and the Afghanistan, with minimal American casualties. However Saddam is ready for High Tech Weaponry, and if he has any smarts, he will fight a different war. He will probably give up most of the country cheaply, and wage pitched street battles in Baghdad. It is not clear if the high tech weapons will give a decisive edge in house to house combat. He will try to drag USA into a bloody long drawn out siege in Baghdad, and wear out the American will. Unless there is a quick coup in Baghdad, I expect the US casualties to number in several thousands.
Worse, the US invasion will give plenty of cannon fodder for Al Qaeda and its affiliated groups, for years to come.
I certainly think that Bush's cure for the Iraqi problem is a lot worse than the disease. |
