Monday, March 10, 2003

USA Today gets it

An editorial in today’s paper “U.S. opponents squander last chance to avoid war” reiterates that the only thing Saddam Hussein understands is force:

Any doubts about how Saddam Hussein behaves when pressures on him are relaxed even a little now can be erased. Though chief United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix gave only a lukewarm endorsement Friday to Iraq's grudging disarmament steps, Saddam is acting as if he deserves a reward rather than a rebuke.

- - - - -

The diplomatic blitz has not won over France, Russia or China, any of which can veto the plan. They claim inspections are working and offer as evidence Saddam's destruction of more than a third of his 100-plus al-Samoud missiles. Ignoring the fact that the missile destruction came only after a U.S. troop buildup in the region reached invasion strength, they propose no alternative for sustaining the pressure. Instead, their solution is to give inspections more time, a tried-and-failed formula that merely invites Saddam's cat-and-mouse games.

This indirectly brings up a good point: do the Euro-weenies think inspections “will work” because the U.S. has now positioned a quarter-million troops around Iraq? Furthermore, do they expect me (the American taxpayer) to support these troops stationed in the Mideast while the endless inspections drag on? In other words, if the U.S. backs off, brings the troops home and says “OK, inspect away!” do you think there is the slightest chance that Saddam Hussein would then allow unfettered inspections? It’s ludicrous.

In fact, how’s this for a counter-proposal to the United Nations? The U.S. withdraws American forces from the area in exchange for stepped-up inspections which includes fast-moving helicopters and the right to stop tractor-trailers driving along the Syrian border. If the Iraqis balk at any aspect of the inspections, then the French military will bear the cost of forcing Iraqi compliance, since it’s the French who most vocally insist Saddam Hussein is willing to disarm.

Why are you laughing?

No comments: