Replies to post #5492 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[Zeev Hed]

I hope and pray you are right. I still fear the law of unintended consequences. I think alternative could be considered though. For instance the current pressures on Iraq right now, and the French and German insisitence on non violent solutions, could be easily translated to a permanent regime of inspection, followed by UN enforcement of human rights in the same manner and a gradual removal of Saddam and the Baath's hold without an actual invasion. Inspectors would have to continue and report monthly, and any deviation would bering back the threat of forcible enforcement. In time, we protect ourselves and the rest of the world from that threat and do not go all the way to war. There are a lot of advantages to such a solution, it shows the wrold we do not enforce our will without regard of world opinion, it gives Germany and France a "way out, but we exact the price of permanent inspection and enforcement of UN presence and control until Iraq develops its own more humane form of Government.

The danger of that approach is that it becomes a fascimile for solving other problems, where this approach simply would not work (for instance the template does not fit the Israeli/Palestinian terrorists conflict nor the US/terrorist groups conflicts.).

Zeev

Zeev

[jimmie]

tom,e pluribus unum, appreciate your logic--one engineer to another.

[brainlessone]

I feel that the military build up against Iraq serves to prevent major terrorist attacks on the US or Britain. It is clear to me that if a strike occurs, then logic or no logic, iraq will be toast. And that is why it is there, and that is why an invasion has not taken place yet. chicken anyone?