A Dove In The Hand

[jbor]

on 29/1/03 7:58 AM, Cyrus at cyrusgeo at netscape.net wrote:

> 
> jbor wrote:
> 
>> Saddam must disarm. Then, no war in Iraq. First things first.
>> 
>> 
> The other day I saw an American official on CNN (sorry, don't remember
> who it was) say even if the UN had 1000 inspectors they still would find
> anything because the weapons are very well hidden. With this kind of
> reasoning, do you think "disarming Saddam" is a phrase that carries any
> meaning at all? Saddam may claim what he likes; the UN inspectors may
> claim what they like; Bush has decided he wants to do away with Saddam
> and he will, UN or no UN.

All due respect to you, I think this argument that "it's all too hard so
let's just leave Saddam be" is naive and pessimistic. You seem to accept
that he has these weapons, it's documented fact that he has used them and
killed tens of thousands of people in both domestic purges and the war with
Iran, and the very great likelihood, according to the Blix report, is that
he is developing them to use again.

By advocating that UN Security Council Directives 40 & 41 be dropped, by
saying "it's all too hard", by letting Saddam do as he likes, the anti-Bush
lobby is sanctioning the very probable deaths of thousands and thousands of
Assyrians, Kurds, Chaldeans, Mandaeans, Iranians, Kuwaitis etc etc in the
region over the next couple of years. Perhaps these people just don't count
to that way of thinking?

Knocking off Saddam might shape up as the best possible solution.

best