In the rathouse 'o interpretation (WAS Re: politics and religion...)

[jbor]

> on 24/2/03 10:31 AM, Mutualcode at aol.com at Mutualcode at aol.com wrote:
> 
> I am not advocating doing nothing. Nor am I advocating trying to bully or
> bride the Security Council into rubberstamping Bush''s misguided and hasty
> call for military intervention, as his administration seems bent on doing.
> 
> I'm pretty much in line with the majority of nations that make up the U.N.,
> which favor peaceful diplomatic pressure- difficult, prolonged, often
> frustrating;
> requiring strength, patience and perseverence- but, I believe, having a
> better chance of succeeding.
> 
> The tacit support for Saddam's past barbarism ironically came from the
> very same camp that is now so vehemently calling for military intervention
> in Iraq, not me. As for any future barbarism, I believe that can be avoided
> best by peaceful diplomatic means, at this stage. However, if, as in Bosnia
> and Kosovo, organized crimes against humanity start recurring, I would
> be supportive of military intervention to save innocents.
> 
> I do not believe that deception about cannisters of chemical weapons or
> biological agents rise to that level, or require war. Unsubtantiated claims
> of connection with those responsible for September 11th are, to my mind,
> on a par with the Gulf of Tonkin fiasco and smack of attempts to manipulate
> public opinion in favor of an unnecessary war.
> 

Seems to me that we're not so far apart in our thinking after all. I think
it's pretty clear that the UN hasn't and won't yield to the unsubstantiated
whims and bullying tactics of the US, or any member nation, and I tend to
think that 11 years of negotiation, pressure, perseverance etc with Saddam,
while the innocents in Iraq have continued to suffer, is already too much.

best