| Subject: Iraq |
Author:
MikeKnight
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 18:56:47 02/12/02 Tue
Foreign extempers will be more interested:
After reading this, do you think the US should go to war with Iraq?
(yes i realize this source is biased and not qualified but we'll pretend)
"Read All About It In The Idler"
11 February 2002
Memo to the President: Saddam Hussein is Behind the Terrorist Attacks
By John LeBoutillier
Are we really going to go to war with Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein and his regime?
That question has dominated the news since last week's State of the Union speech.
Secretary of State Colin Powell's testimony to Congress last week only further reinforced the belief that an attack could come sometime this year. Powell even said the US would go to war with Iraq -- alone, if need be -- and shun the so-called 'Coalition' that supported our Afghan campaign and our Desert Storm effort 11 years ago.
But Iraq thinks otherwise.
Saddam thinks he can "talk" his way out of this pickle.
As reported in Wednesday's New York Daily News column by Michael Kramer, Baghdad sent Kramer an email. It read, "Watch us again. It's worked for us in the past. It'll work for us again."
Sure enough, Baghdad, clearly reacting to President Bush's speech, sent a message through Arab League chief Amr Moussa that it is ready to talk with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan "without preconditions."
Annan, who has been regularly used and duped by Saddam in the late 1990's, replied that he'd "check his calendar." He then indicated that he is prepared to talk to Iraq.
What does this all mean?
It means that Saddam Hussein is going to use 'talks' with the UN to divide the US from the rest of the Coalition. (Editor's note: Russia has warned the United States against attacking Iraq.)
Saddam Hussein is gambling that Bush-Cheney-Powell will not go to war alone. And he believes that by talking to the United Nations he might even get what he really wants: sanctions either totally lifted or at least relaxed.
These are restrictions on how much oil Saddam can legally sell for invaluable hard currency, which he then uses to secretly buy military equipment and materials to construct nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.
The key question is: How long can Saddam stall, filibuster and delay the inevitable realization that he will never really allow us to monitor his weapons programs?
For in reality, Saddam Hussein is behind the terrorist attacks against the US.
From the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to the Embassy attacks, the USS Cole and, finally, to September 11th, Saddam's security forces have waged a war against America to avenge his massive defeat in the Gulf War.
For some unknown reason our government in Washington, DC, under both President Clinton and President G.W. Bush, does not want to admit this, at least not publicly.
Sure, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda are, and were, involved. But they carry out Saddam's wishes.
Osama and his followers are the perfect fanatics -- 'true believers' -- who, in Saddam's eyes are just crazy enough to kill themselves, while killing Americans.
How can you beat that?
No surviving witnesses to tell who really orchestrated the attacks.
We should all fear two things:
1) that Saddam will hit us again;
and
2) that the Bush Administration will 'wimp' out yet again when it comes to finishing the job begun in 1991.
If Saddam Hussein, or his family, or Socialist Ba'th Party remain in power when G.W. Bush finishes his term as President, then his Presidency will have been a failure.
Period.
This isn't my judgement; it is based on President Bush's own words and promises.
Having ID'd the 'Axis of Evil' last week, how can we tolerate its continued existence?
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 