[SPORK] Holy Shiite! US pulling out of Saudi Arabia
gojomo at usa.net
Tue Apr 29 22:04:23 PDT 2003
> Gordon Mohr:
> >Excising the Baath malignancy was a precondition for addressing problems
> >elsewhere more delicately and effectively.
> So all the business with the UN about searching
> for WMDs really *was* a charade? Just as Bush's
> critics have been saying?
As I noted at length in an earlier post, as long
as there was any hope of UN endorsement, the WMD
case had to be overemphasized and the (much more
moral but offensive to the "international
community") humanitarian case underemphasized.
To do otherwise would have been to even more
completely disrespect the UN and its previous
anti-Iraq actions, generating even more tangible
opposition. As it was, we got a de facto "abstain"
from the UN, rather than either an "endorse" or
But the other important rationales for action
against Iraq were also being made, in the other
appropriate forums, where such rationales were
> You see, Gordon, I was happy for us to invade
> Iraq. And I hope we have the wisdom to make
> good use of having done so. But the prelude to
> that was deceptive, dishonorable, and
> unnecessary, not with regard to Iraq, but in
> how we dealt with the rest of the world.
What was the alternative?
Honestly saying to the UN and its club, "even if Iraq's
WMD program is now in shards and remnants, the fact
that they lust for regional dominance and WMDs, and
are holding their own citizenry hostage until they again
have a chance to grab at those prizes, means we won't
be safe until the Baathists are ousted"?
No matter how right that case would be, it's not
within the UN's nature to even consider such a
rationale. If the UN got an incomplete and somewhat
misleading case, it's because that's the only sort
of case they'd accept. If that's the only
prelude you saw, you were paying too much attention
to the UN's false narrative, and not to all the
other discussion happening in more important (and
More information about the FoRK