Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PartyTime who wrote (10246)	2/19/2003 10:25:01 AM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 25898

Marching for the Enemy <<he's talking about you PT> By Amir Taheri The Wall Street Journal \| February 19, 2003 For almost a year the Don't-Touch-Saddam lobby has been warning that action against the Iraqi tyrant could provoke an explosion in the "Arab street." The promised explosion came on Saturday. But it was on the streets of Western capitals, from Berlin to Washington. Watching the marchers here one could not help feeling that larger demonstrations could have been organized by the estimated 1.2 million people, mostly Iraqis and Iranians, who have died as a direct result of the tyrant's policy of repression and war in the past 25 years. Others might have joined them: the four million Iraqis driven into exile and the 1.5 million Iraqis and Iranians disabled during eight years of war. If the "Arab street," and the "Muslim street" in general, have refused to "explode" it is because most Arabs and Muslims know what Saddam Hussein has done to his peoples, and to his neighbors. In this conflict there are only two sides: On the one side stand Saddam and his regime, on the other the peoples of Iraq. When you stand with one you necessarily stand against the other. The "anti-war" label doesn't change that fact. Let us recall that the same label was used, by the same naïve souls misled by the same scoundrels, when the world was debating the use of force to liberate the peoples of Bosnia and Kosovo. And the same trick themes, used then, are used now. "Let's give diplomacy another chance," Francois Mitterrand urged for much of the 1990s. During that time a quarter million Bosnian Muslims were massacred, and a million driven out of their homes. Diplomacy was also given "another chance" while the Rambouillet Treaty was negotiated with Slobodan Milosevic. The price? Up to 10,000 Kosovar Muslims dead. We were told that military action against Radovan Karadzic and Milosevic would "destabilize the Balkans." That didn't happen. We were warned that Russia might veto a resolution authorizing force to rescue the peoples of the former Yugoslavia. No such thing happened. We were told to allow the U.N. inspection mission in Kosovo to "do its work." It did, indeed, do its work -- visiting mass graves where massacred Muslims were buried, and taking video footage. Now, too, we are told to give the inspectors time and informed that they are "making progress." It's as if the inspectors had not had enough time during the past 12 years. In any case, the subject of Resolution 1441 is disarmament, not inspection. Inspection was the subject of the 16 previous resolutions, including 1248, which led to the appointment of Hans Blix. The truth is that inspection is working fine. What is not working fine is disarmament. The teams led by Mr. Blix have visited 300 of the 813 sites that Iraq has agreed to let them visit, and have found nothing. Given another six months or so they would visit all the remaining sites and still find nothing, because they are not meant to. The inspectors have interviewed seven of the 3,896 Iraqi scientists listed to have a role in the Iraqi weapons programs. Given another four years, Mr. Blix's men might interview many more of them. And they will find absolutely nothing, because they are not meant to. Mr. Blix sees his mission as one of inspection, not detection. He inspects what is shown to him, then writes a report. Even if he had 10,000 men under him he would still not find what the Iraqis might wish to hide from him. And each time he is about to appear at the Security Council, Saddam will give them a new "concession." Last time it was the presidential sites; then U2 flights; and, most recently, Saddam's edict to ban weapons of mass destruction. The edict is meaningless, a propaganda declaration. And yet a ban was supposed to have come into effect in April 1991! If necessary, Saddam will offer to polish Mr. Blix's clogs. But he'll never tell him where Iraq is hiding weapons that it admits it once had. Nor will Saddam let anyone know what his weapons-makers are doing. His cheat-and-retreat strategy has worked for 12 years. Unless something hard hits him, there's no reason why he should stop. In another 12 years he'll be 77, younger than some Arab rulers. After that, he could place a son in command to continue the game