Intermediate Form

Disarmament == Regime Change

Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry

Say, for a moment, that the US does not attack Iraq. Instead, we send our troops on a camping trip in sunny Kuwait, where they can threaten Iraq without attacking.

Moving even further away from the real world, say the UNMOVIC inspections all of a sudden become more effective. More intrusive inspections, backed by the threat of force and the use of psychics, find all of the weapons that Saddam has been hiding for the last decade.

Introducing more fantasy than is present in the average game of Dungeons & Dragons, let's say that Saddam stands by and allows the UN inspectors to destroy said weapons.

Now what?

Unlike countries like South Africa and Ukraine which have voluntarily chosen to disarm, Iraq has had the requirement to disarm forced upon it by others. Saddam has never chosen to disarm, and has protested every step along the way.

If the inspectors were to finish their job and leave Iraq, Saddam would have no qualms about rearming. And that's the problem. We don't want to solve this problem for now, we want to solve it forever, or at least to remove the obvious threat.

As long as a government that desires WMD is in power in Iraq, disarmament will only be a temporary condition. For real disarmament to take place, the regime in Iraq needs to change.

- Tom | permalink | changelog | Last updated: 2003-03-06 13:53

Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry

Comments

Commenting has been suspended due to spam.