| The
Alternative to Preemption
:: by R. Frank | R. Frank's bio | Weapons
inspectors were a colossal joke in the first place (was the United States
on Candid Camera?). Re-deploying the inspectors in the current world context
constitutes a time-buying, cat and mouse game where Saddam is the cat...
and the winner. This, by the way, is the case regardless of what Saddam's
public relations point man, Scott Ritter, says nowadays. Speaking of Scott, where in the media besides select members of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy can we find Ritter's feet being held to the fire in regards to the inconsistencies about Saddam's weapons-of-mass-destruction-making-hobby? The liberal media's superstar reporter Helen Thomas' comparison of Iraq to Israel rings loud in my ears. What you're saying now doesn't jive with what you said in '98 Scott. Which set of statements is the [true] set? Even your pseudo-answers to Hannity were unacceptable. The $400,000 for "In Shifting Sands" certainly is interesting... I can't imagine someone selling their soul for such a pathetic price, so you won't be implicated here Scott. Scott Ritter is not the only naysayer. Hillary's 2008 campaign manager and Terry Mcauliffe's voice box, Bill, wants us to find Osama first, because without that end, the current war has yet to be won. Another legacy attempter, Jimmy Carter- the apparent head of Cuban Weapons Inspections, is also pressing for the reins to be pulled on Iraq in all of his deep-thinking and pro-American wisdom. If you recall, it was Carter who so meticulously canvassed Fidel's island for any trace of WMD efforts- and assured us (and the world) that we were safe from that madman. Tom Daschle, the Senate's obstructionist-in-chief, demands an impractical, and obviously unattainable, complete coalition buy-in. There will NEVER be a power vacuum in this world Tom... aren't you thankful that WE are the superpower? Our International "allies" (note quotes) are pressing for the resurrection of the failed weapons inspection program. The U.N. weapons inspectors, after 7 years of searching for evidence of Iraq's weapons program, weren't even able to find the 25 warheads (filled w/ biowarfare agents, including anthrax and deadly botulinum toxin) that Iraq ADMITTED it had in a 1995 U.N. declaration. So there's a novel idea- let's send them back. and perhaps we should send Baghdad Scott back to lead the new team... with Saddam's gracious permission, that is. I'm sure Saddam will welcome the time it buys him. Does the American and European leftists actually believe, in all of their profound wisdom, that we should wait until we have become the object of Iraqi aggression to respond, so as not to be a war-mongering nation that just throws its military might around with reckless abandon, and for no reason? Remember this: American foreign policy measures capability, not intent. One is measurable, the other is not. In Iraq's case, both are concerns. The Bill Clintons, Tom Daschles, and John (F) Kerrys of the world living on the left side of civilized reality have some explaining to do. It seems that recent news footage proves that they were uncharacteristically hawkish in their support of pre-emptively attacking Iraq toward the end of the embarrassingly corrupt Clinton years. Now, these same distinguished public servants have returned to the same anti-war rhetoric democrats were spewing during Bush (41)'s administration... and are tripping over each other to suggest reasons why Bush (43) should not attack Iraq. What's different now? Each day that passes actually finds the situation more grim than the day before. Why the stonewalling? The only difference now is that the White House is occupied by a Republican. It would be awfully shallow-thinking of me to think that this could possibly be their motivation. Could liberal democrats in Congress, who so deeply care about the well-being of all Americans, possibly be so callous to our national security as to play petty politics while we're under attack as a nation? The alternative to preemption is reaction. Is that where we'd rather be? -R. Frank
|
PreventTruthDecay home