SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bearcatbob who wrote (24629)12/27/1998 1:14:00 PM
From: Les H  Read Replies (1) of 67261
 
Solving the Iraq Problem
By David Silverberg
Hill News hillnews.com

The day after he took office, President Al Gore delivered new and radical directions to his Cabinet and the congressional leadership regarding his policy toward Iraq — a policy designed to resolve the Iraq problem once and for all. The Hill has obtained the text of his remarks and presents it here.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I intend for my administration to pursue a new policy toward Iraq.

Until now we have followed President Clinton's policy of "dual containment" toward Iraq and Iran. This idea of containment is an outgrowth of our successful policy toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. However, we can't just mindlessly pursue what worked in the past simply because it worked in the past.

Containment was formulated toward the Soviet Union due to a specific set of circumstances in the immediate wake of World War II, namely, the Soviet Union was militarily equal to the United States and in some ways superior, and its possession of nuclear weapons meant that an old-fashioned hot war had the potential to impose unacceptable damage on the United States.

The answer was containment, which resulted in a constant series of confrontations but minimized the possibility of mutually assured destruction.

The drawbacks of a containment policy are that it takes an immensely long time to pursue — it took 40 years to win against the Soviet Union — and it is inordinately expensive.

Iraq is not militarily equal to the United States and past attacks have eroded what capability it had in 1991. There is no reason to pursue a policy of containment. We have attacked Iraq repeatedly with only incremental results. Our efforts to subvert the regime of Saddam Hussein have failed and, given the weak and fractured opposition, they are unlikely to bear fruit in the future. We cannot depend on the possibility that Saddam will be assassinated and there's no reason to expect a popular revolt. Yet Saddam continues to pose a danger to our oil supplies, our allies, and our vital interests.

I am therefore changing our policy from one of containment to one of liberation. We will liberate the people of Iraq and the countries of the region from the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.

Gen. Shelton, please start preparing for a ground war against Iraq and for the occupation of the country. We will plan our operations on the presumption that we will have to act alone or, at most, with only our British allies.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Majority Leader, Mr. Minority Leader, upon Iraq's next provocation, I will ask the Congress for a formal declaration of war. We should go into this united, with congressional approval and in accordance with the Constitution. I don't need a political stunt and I'm not performing one. I would like to request that you prepare the members for what is coming.

This will not be an easy or cost-free operation but I do intend for it to succeed. I will leave the details of the operations to our military and they will have a free hand in planning the operation. We will either capture Saddam Hussein alive and put him on trial for crimes against humanity, or he will be killed in the course of our operations —and I sincerely hope for the latter result.

The problem that I as president will face is the withdrawal of American troops after the operation and creating a post-war settlement that accomplishes two things: ends the danger posed by Iraq to the Gulf states and continues to contain Iran. I have decided that it is no longer possible to continue to maintain the territorial integrity of Iraq without a strong, Saddam-like person in charge. Since we do not have that person, and since we don't simply want to replace one brutal dictator with another, I have decided that we will not attempt to maintain the territorial integrity of Iraq. Instead we will support and promote the breakup of Iraq into three countries.

In the north, we will support creation of Kurdistan. We will seek to bring the Kurdish factions together into a single, coalition government and get them to sign a convention renouncing any claims on Turkish territory in exchange for Turkish recognition. In fact, we intend Kurdistan to be a satellite of Turkey. This will be difficult to sell to the Turkish government but I am willing to support Turkey in a variety of other fora like the European Union in order to achieve it.

In the center, we will create a Sunnistan or, for lack of a better
term, Baghdadistan. We intend this to be a satellite of Jordan.
We will "de-Baath" the country and install a democratic
government which we will attempt to influence.

In the south, we will help create Shiastan with its capital at
Basra. This will be a satellite of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia,
backed by power of the United States.

Mr. Director of Central Intelligence, our new task will be to
contain Iran and prevent it from intervening or subverting these
three new countries. We will have to be vigilant and effective.
We will have to prevent Shiastan from turning around and
inciting the Shia populations of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and
that will be no small task.

Madame Secretary, at the same time, I intend to pursue
whatever diplomatic openings we can forge with Iran and we will
try to normalize trade and diplomatic relations with that country
in the hope that we can prevent any Iranian adventures into the
former Iraq.

I realize that this course of action brings with it risks. We will be
actively engaged in the Gulf for the foreseeable future. However,
we've been engaged there anyway since 1938 so this is nothing
new. We will have to allay some Arab resentment of our active
intervention, but this a burden we can carry. We will still have to
contain Iran, but this should be less expensive and take less
military effort than containing Iraq. We will forge trade and oil
ties with the states of the former Iraq, benefiting both them and
the population of the United States.

As the previous president failed, so too has his policy. The
change of administration presents a new opportunity and I
intend to seize it.

One thing, however, is certain: Saddam Hussein must be
destroyed.

David Silverberg is president of Silverberg Indpendent Media. He
can be watched at Sisl/Media@erols.com.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext