HP3000-L Archives

December 2003, Week 5

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Chuck Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Chuck Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 31 Dec 2003 08:24:02 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (51 lines)
> It's not a question of playing "armchair quarterback". It's a 
> question of reviewing history. A year ago there was a large 
> body of "counter proposals".  Many people urged Bush to be 
> less impatient about the inspections for WMDs and criticized 
> his urgency to go to war. They suggested he use more 
> diplomacy and acquire more support from the UN. He also 
> rejected Saddam's offer to allow more and greater WMD 
> inspections. Bush chose to reject all such opportunities for 
> more peaceful solutions to the Iraqi problems. He denigrated 
> the UN calling it irrelevant. Many of the folks who made 
> those suggestions were ignored and simply called anti-war and anti-US.
> 

The inspector's were only let back in because of the US's preperation
for war.

Saddam played the same game repeatedly over the years. Any time it
looked like support was mounting to oppose him he would make some small
concessions and various UN diplomats would make impressive speeches
about how much progress was being made. Then as soon as the pressure was
off Saddam would once again stop cooperating until the cycle was
repeated.

Had the US backed down and brought its troops home Saddam would have
kicked out the inspectors once again and it is unlikely that he would
have faced any serious challenge again in his lifetime.

Perhaps we should forward your post to Saddam's new jail cell. He might
find some consolation in the thought that his tactics actually did fool
someone out there.

<snip>

> Those were the "alternative solutions" which Bush chose to 
> ignore. The criticism is well deserved.
> 

The only alternative was to continue the game as it was being played
with Saddam financing terrorism, such as his payments to suicide bombers
in Isreal, and thumbing his nose at the rest of the world.

Finishing the Iraq war was a good strategic move in the war on terror
which is already paying dividends (Lybia, Pakistan, etc...) as the
countries around the world that support terrorism see that they may
actually have to pay a price for their support.

Comments are my own, not my employer's... Etc.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2