Back to Index

US: Action against Iraq

General Mike Sullivan says: " I believe Daryl BeBell misread Dwight Peterson's statement on supporting the President by saying that "he blindly supports the President during crisis". What Dwight is saying is that after 9/11 the world has changed and particularly the United States. We have been severely wounded and the President is saying to all who will listen "no more Mr Nice're either with us or against us...if you threaten us we're coming after you...we prefer peace but if we have to we will fight to keep our country safe and secure." Dwight believes, as do I, that the Bush Administration has developed a prudent policy for fighting terrorism and disarming Iraq that is just, enforceable and offers the best outcome for future world stability. This policy should make Americans feel safer about their own security and lessen the chance of terrorist attacks in America. 90% of the American people were behind the President after 9/11 for all the right reasons using the philosophy that Dwight used. That support is dropping off as time goes by as Americans are impatient, worried about terrorism abroad and coming to America and suffering from an economic slowdown. This makes the case for the Administration to get on with disarming Iraq asap to defuse the pressure and hassling from abroad, the UN and American politics. The more liberal thinkers whether they be media, politicians, academia, the average citizen or retired military officers, are beginning to sound a little like Neville Chamberlain (as mentioned in another WAISer's email) as they think they can negoiate, without force, an Iraqi disarmament. The world prays for such an outcome, however, if dealing with Saddam over the past 11 years is any indication, he can't be trusted as he is a butcher. If the UN won't take action, then the US is forced into going it alone or with allies who agree with our policy.. In my mind Iraq is as dangerous as Hitler's Germany in that Saddam can spread havoc and terror throughout the world, npt just Europe, if he uses any WMDs. Worrying about setting off a powder keg in the Middle East is not what the Administration's policy makers and strategists say will happen as it's pretty hard to imagine how much more volatile the Mid East, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India can get. If the Administration prevails with their policies then more power to them. if not, there will be a different political party in power leading the country in a two years. Immediate, forceful action is now required, and there are no guarantees that it will work. Our leaders must make the life and death decisions on what they feel are prudent and in the best interests of the American people. They have the authority and the responsibility. If we go to war they deserve our support"

RH: See Tom Moore's piece on the role of Congress and of the possible consequences of a pre-emptive strike, including World War III.

Ronald Hilton - 1/20/03