« Eternal Hunger | Main | She was coming on to me! »

December 08, 2006

Comments

ren

I would avoid beating ourselves up too hard on this-- we were, after all, fresh off the WTC trauma table, when the Iraq war was proposed.

The UN, France, Germany & Russia had all been bought by "Oil for Food" money, and nobody stood with us in our Clintonist assumption of the police duties in Saddam's Iraq. (We were militarily engaged there long before GW and his WMD appeared).

My move would have been to invade Iraq, and immediately partition . Sunni, Kurd, & Shia. Watch. That's how it will end up.

The extant 1991-2001 situation of the USA bombing the place under the UN mandate, and then paying off the bombed Saddam in Oil 4 Food, only to have it channeled as graft to our closest world peers, was also an untenable situation.

Under those conditions, Saddam felt free to initiate, aid, plan, co-plan, or give comfort to any number of USA-diminishing actions, one of which was the 1993 WTC bombing, continued into its cleanup phase, with Saddamist cash, by Mohammed Atta's splinter cell, as the 9-11-2001 air attacks. Please note the lack of any further such attacks.

The option of peaceful non-action would have entrenched the Saddamist graft-takers, bolstered Saddam's need to demonstrate the diminishment of the USA, and many, many stateside martyr actions would have been perpetrated.

Thanks be to Bush's clueless spasm of a "Get Saddam" strike, we have been spared such attacks (for now).

What I despise the most, in all of this, is the growth of smug wordism in the place of history study, the growth of splinter politics, the absence of uniting politics, and the acid bath of defeatist secularist existentialism, dooming the USA to actionless leadership for the fosreseeable future.

In such a framework, we can only attack each other. John Hall is in the vanguard of that societal cannibalism.

Eat hearty!
The victim you roast, will be a fellow citizen!

The comments to this entry are closed.