Posted by Allen on 3/27/2003, 6:01 pm, in reply to "War on Iraq" You wrote, "I do not believe the U.S. has the authority, through any agency, to deride Iraq's soveriegnty by saying it must disarm or abide by no-fly-zone policies." This is something I've been wondering about. I had been given to understand that the cease-fire which ended the Persian Gulf War in 1991 provided for the the coalition's right to patrol the no-fly zones etc. That, in effect, under international law, Iraq authorized it's own invasion when they broke the cease-fire which they had signed. Also, Mr. Apollo, I would like to ask you a question. Out here in Lincoln, the protesters are few and well behaved. In Portland, do most of the protesters who break the law insist on being arrested? Perhaps I'm old-fashioned, but the whole point of civil disobedience is to get arrested. If the protester chooses to break the law, and then seeks to avoid arrest, he has dishonored himself and his cause. He's worse than a common criminal. Personally, I don't have any problem with lawful expression of political opinion, or even civil disobedience(true civil disobedience, where the civil disobeyer insists upon being arrested and tried in court). I know that most servicemen are young and that young people sometimes take things to heart. However, they must realize that the right of political protest is what they're bringing to Iraq, and we must, therefore, accept it ourselves. I mean, there's nothing great about tolerating opinion with which we agree. I'm guessing that Saddam has moved all his chemical weapons into Bagdad. This would explain why none have been found yet, but it also makes sense. He wouldn't have wanted any to fall into coalition hands prematurely and he would want the coalition troops concentrated, and well away from their bases, before he played his only trump. But I don't think he can wait until the coalition has begun to enter the city either, can he? What would be the point at that late date? His place in History? One last blow at The Great Satan before he goes to his reward? I don't know how he really thinks of such things in his heart of hearts. Here's a good website, The International Institute for Strategic Studies - http://www.iiss.org/iraq.php To my mind, the more important question is what comes after. After the war, some 300,000 U.S. troops will be stationed in Iraq for a shorter or longer time. If you didn't catch Thomas Friedman's special on the Discovery Channel last night, "Searching for the Roots of 9/11", it will repeat all this week, I think. Arab resentment against the West in general, and America in particular, can only be exacerbated by yet another instance of their inferiority and haplessness. When all of Saddam's horrors have been laid bare and documented, some will dismiss it all as a lying Jewish plot, but they'll still be faced with the fact that they lost again. Eventually, they'll have to come to the conclusion that resentment is not a plan; that their humiliation is the fault of their kleptocratic fascist buffoon leaders; that liberal democratic capitalism is the only hope they have to take their rightful place among the family of nations. Nazi Germany did it. Imperial Japan did it. And if they did it, anyone can.
162.40.96.4
Phoebus Apollo,
Message Thread:
« Back to thread