"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. ( Hawk what is this.)
Chinu... I can't help you if you don't comprehend English.
But I'll try and explain it once again to you.. Bush stated that some people claim that we should wait to deal with Iraq until such time as he's actually threatening us with the WMDs that he's NOT supposed to be developing at all.
Additionally, Bush was concerned that Saddam might provide WMD related technology to affiliated terrorist organizations, using them for a "false flag" attack as is being hypothesized with the Czech Intelligence reports that Muhammed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague.
There is NOTHING in Bush's speech that stated that Iraq was an imminent threat. But he did warn us that Saddam was so intransigent that he would not stop conspiring to reconstitute his war-making capability at his first opportunity.
It's at the heart of Saddam's psychological make-up that he has to dominate his surroundings, including other countries. To confront anyone, or anything that stands in his way.
And it's tantamount to some of the speeches Churchill gave related to rise of Adolf Hitler in the early '30s.
Most logical people understand the analogy. They understand that if the League of Nations had confronted Hitler over his invasion of Czechoslovakia or Austria, it's quite possible that a similar scenario would have been created, with Hitler constantly challenging and defying the mandates of the League.
Instead, the League did nothing about the annexation of Austria.. Not even a peep. And we know that Hitler's ambition knew no bounds, once he realized that he could intimidate the rest of the world into appeasing him.
And we all know that without the US and UK enforcing an "unauthorized" containment strategy against Iraq relying upon military force, Saddam would have become even more aggressive.
So if you're sick of seeing people play with words, then maybe you should be directing some of your outrage at the other members of the UN, all of which talk a good game, but leave it to the US and UK to implement their rules.
Or better yet, dissolve the UN entirely. Because they obviously are not a credible organization if every brutal dictator out there knows that the UN won't oppose them with force.
Hawk |
