At 03:05 PM 3/4/2003 -0800 Deborah Harrell wrote:
>But there is a subset of the "war" option: essentially
>unilateral US war, or UN-sanctioned military
>action/war
>(with the US of course being the major player). I
>think I already wrote this, so apologies if a repeat:
>all of the people I know who are against unilateral US
>action (well, unless a 'smoking gun' showed Saddam
>connected with the Tower bombing) support
>UN-sanctioned action. Reasons include physical
>support by other nations for rebuilding Iraq, and the
>appearance of a 'world decision' rather than 'US
>bullying.'
Debbi:
I think that this is one of the things gautam was saying doesn't really
exist when he said that "no third option exists."
The United Nations Security Council UNANIMOUSLYpassed resolution 1441 back
in November (I think, +/- one month anyways), which stated that Iraq must
FULLY disclose all of its weapons of mass destructions programs or else
face serious consequences.
In keeping with the spirit of this resolution, the United States began
formal preparations to carry out the "serious consequences" stated in
resolution 1441 if Iraq failed to fully disclose its weapons programs.
After several months of preparations, the United States now has 250,000
troops in the region, soon to be 300,000. This is actualy 1 out of every
1,000 men, women, and children in the US.
Iraq has UNDENIABLY failed to fully disclose its weapons of mass
destruction programs as stated under resolution 1441. Moreover, it is
clear that Iraq has adopted a policy of hiding everything it can, and
hoping to only disclose those things it is caught having. Thus, it is
UNDENIABLE that in a conutry the size of California, no amount of
inspections can even HOPE to uncover all of Iraq's weapons of mass
destructions, unless it fully discloses them - hence Resolution 1441.
Again, it has undeniably failed to do so.
Finally, the window of opportunity to launch serious consequences is
closing. It is virtually impossible for the US to protect our troops from
the use of chemical weapons in the middle of the Iraqi summer, while
fighting a war. Since we need to leave ourselves a time window of a
couple months to complete the war (God willing, it will never come to that
- but prudence is required in this matter), the last window of opportunity
is essentially now. The US simply cannot afford to keep 300,000 soldiers
away from their families and thousands of miles overseas in a somewhat
hostile region over the summer, nor can it afford the substantial monetary
cost of doing so. Moreover, we cannot afford to bring our troops home
for a few months and send them back in the Fall.
Thus, the window of opprotunity is now. If this coalition that you prefer
fails to materialize next week, as seems likely, then as Gautam stated, you
are reduced to two options:
1) Go it alone.
2) Don't go in - or as we have noted, doing exactly what Saddam wants us to
do.
What do you choose?
JDG
_______________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world,
it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
