From: "Miller, Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: V-I Day +1 - endgame scenarios? Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:22:58 -0800
Whether you're for or against the upcoming war, I think most reasoned people with a shred of honesty in them believe its going to happen, and we'll hardly lose (even if, as is likely, its a far more serious contest then the WH is admitting) My question is, what then? So we depose Saddam.. then what? What do we _do_ with him?
<snip>
As a further question, why can't we just provide a list of exactly what the Iraqi government needs to do in order to avert a war? Why, after Blix releases a somewhat positive report, are we suddenly insisting on "regime change" as a requirement to prevent invasion?
The _UN_ has provided such a list to Iraq, coupled with repeated warnings since 1991. Iraq was sanctioned by the UN and ordered to comply with specific requirements and resolutions. All they have to do to avoid war is comply with the UN sanctions. They're well aware of this.
For the last 12 years, Iraq has requested that the sanctions be lifted and announced that it has complied with the requirements of the sanctions. It has not. Iraq's modus operandi has been to wait until they are threatened with severe consequences and then make a token gesture for appeasement purposes. It's hard to take 'somewhat positive' reports seriously anymore.
In particular, there have been (well documented in the media) incomplete WMD declarations to and access provided to weapons inspectors and Iraq's ongoing human rights violations for the past 12 years. Three separate reports commissioned in the 90's by UNSCOM detailed noncompliance with regard to several WMD issues. The UN and UNSC have been ineffective at forcing Iraq to give up it's WMD programs. At this point, they've had over a decade, and considering their previous record I would say that waiting for Iraq to comply with UN requirements is probably a fools errand. And IIRC, President Hussein used chemical weapons against Iranian troops in the 80's, so he's shown a propensity towards their use. (I could be wrong on that.)
Iraq has also lied with regard to the sanctions' effects on infant mortality rates, civilian mortality rates and suffering. In fact, Hussein has spent billions on approx 80 or 90 new palaces since the Gulf War while he complained his people were starving.
I wouldn't place the blame on the current US administration for this. They're simply pointing out that Hussein has been violating UN sanctions and playing games with UN inspectors for years. All Iraq & President Hussein ever had to do to avert war was comply with UN requirements.
Jon
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
