Five quotes follow.  Who said them?


1-  To those who would doubt the necessity of the actions by the president, 
one should pose the question as to what the consequences would be in the 
face of American inaction. First, clearly, no other country would take the 
lead. The signature of the current era is such that response to aggression 
will not be taken up by other powers in the absence of American leadership, 
unfortunately. This was the case in the invasion of Kuwait. It was the case 
in Bosnia when, after several years of Western inaction in the face of 
ethnic atrocities in Bosnia, only the United States, only the United 
States, could bring about a credible, effective implementation of peace in 
that sorry part of Europe. . . . It is American leadership which is 
decisive to the peace in these regions…

2- "Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the 
Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. 
Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so? . . . 
The answer is, we don't have another option. We have got to force them to 
comply, and we are doing so militarily."

3- I hope Saddam Hussein and those who are in control of the Iraqi 
government clearly understand the resolve and determination of this 
administration and this country. This may be a political year, . . . but on 
this issue there can be no disunity. There can be no lack of cohesion. We 
stand united, Republicans and Democrats, determined to send as clear a 
message with as clear a resolve as we can articulate: Saddam Hussein's 
actions will not be tolerated. His willingness to brutally attack Kurds in 
northern Iraq and abrogate U.N. resolutions is simply unacceptable. We 
intend to make that point clear with the use of force, with the use of 
legislative language, and with the use of other actions that the president 
and the Congress have at their disposal.

4. “None of us knows why Saddam decided to test us now.  But if the history 
of the last six years has taught us anything, it is that Saddam Hussein 
does not understand diplomacy, he only understands power, and when he 
brandishes power in a manner that threatens our interests or violates 
internationally accepted standards of behavior, we must be prepared to 
respond--and with force if necessary.”  Such force might well be used 
unilaterally: "The United States under President Bush and then President 
Clinton, led these earlier efforts to contain Saddam. Whereas some of our 
allies in the region are constrained from acting on this occasion, we are not."

5.  The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens 
the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the 
world.

The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi 
government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a 
government that respects the rights of its people.

Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of 
inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a 
far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his 
neighbors. He will make war on his own people.

And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will 
deploy them, and he will use them.

Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these 
dangers in the future.



Dr. J. David Edwards
UC Foundation Associate Professor and MPA Coordinator
Department of Political Science
417A Fletcher Hall
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
615 McCallie Avenue
Chattanooga, TN  37403
Telephone (423)425-4068 or 4281
Email <[log in to unmask]>