Mark,
There's a huge difference between using unverified intelligence to justify continuing economic sanctions versus using unverified intelligence to go to war. Clinton didn't hype up the rhetoric like the Bush administration did to frighten the American public into believing war was necessary. Clinton did not saturate the airwaves with frightful visions of the Iraqis handing over WMDs to international terrorists to kill American citizens. Clinton may have earnestly believed that the Iraqis still possessed some chemical and biological weapons, but he also believed that the sanctions, no fly zones and occasional missile in the heart of Baghdad was sufficient to contain Saddam's ambitions. Turns out, he was right.
As for toppling Saddam, the American people would have never supported going to war were they not convinced by the Bush administration that Saddam's mythical WMDs were a threat to our safety and security. Bush used the emotions of 9/11 and questionable intelligence to manipulate public opinion.
Sure its great Saddam is gone, but, ultimately, at what price? Nearly 1,500 Americans have died in a war, the Iraqi people should have taken on themselves. In the meantime, both Iran and North Korea are developing WMDs with impunity and we are powerless to stop them.
In the final analysis, our unprovoked war in Iraq is bad foreign policy and not the most effective way for us to have achieved our objectives in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. Its great the Iraqis can now vote, but without a tradition of self-determination built from the actions of their own populace, how long do we expect it to last before devolving into an islamic republic that looks an awful lot like Iran? In international politics, nothing ever given to anyone on a silver platter is ever sustaining.
Donald
Current Events » in reply to A Repitition Of The Same Errors
re: A Repitition Of The Same Errors
The whole thread (65 posts)
- U.S. Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Findings
- An interesting contrast...
- My wife was a federal grain inspector.
- But did the explosion kill the person who orderred her to lie?
- Federal inspectors
- "Trust me, I'm a doctor." (n/t)
- re: "Trust me, I'm a federal grain inspector"
- I think the logical outcome of your argument
- Interesting...
- if you stop thinking in absolutes, you may come to understand (n/t)
- Wild mischaracterization!
- Go back and read your quote again.
- You read it right: now how does that imply criminality? (n/t)
- re: Go back and read your quote again.
- Go back and read your quote again.
- Interesting...
- I think the logical outcome of your argument
- re: "Trust me, I'm a federal grain inspector"
- Please explain. Your comment went right by me. (n/t)
- Leave It To The Private Sector Is Tom's Mantra
- re: Leave it to the private sector whenever possible is Tom's mantra
- Yes, and the private "inspectors" will be greased and nothing will change.
- Very naive
- Apply The Power Corrupts Reasoning All The Way Through The System (n/t)
- re: Leave it to the private sector whenever possible is Tom's mantra
- Leave It To The Private Sector Is Tom's Mantra
- "Trust me, I'm a doctor." (n/t)
- The actual survey documents...
- Not surprising
