In article <
[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:37:33 -0500, David Kerber wrote:
>
> > That's part of it, but only a small part. The real reason for attacking Iraq and not even
> > discussing attacking NK is two-fold:
> >
> > 1) Iraq has let it be known that they want to have more influence in the middle east (witness
> > their invasion of Kuwait);
>
> Well, Kuwait was, at one time (early 20th century), a province of Iraq, as they had claimed. Not
> that that justifies invasion. Also, maybe you don't recall, but N. Korea did also try to expand
> its borders as well -- into what was at one time the rest of Korea.
Yes, and we helped drive them out at a cost of tens of thousands of American lives. Driving Iraq out
of Kuwait was not as costly, but even more necessary.
> > there is concern that with WMD's, they could coerce their other oil-rich neighbors into doing
> > Iraq's will, giving Iraq control of something like 50% of the worlds oil. So it's not Iraq's own
> > oil which is the reason, but rather the rest of the area's oil, which the rest of the world
> > needs. NK is not in that kind of situation to have a direct effect on our national interest.
>
> So, the national interest is the oil.
Of course, but not Iraq's oil specifically.
> > 2) Iraq's military was *much* weaker than NK's.
>
> So, we make war not on the basis of the weapons or concerns about aggression or terror, but based
> on whether we can whip 'em.
No, the decisions are based on what is in our best interest. Attacking a military nearly as strong
as ours, with nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them, just to depose a dictator who has
WMD's is not in our interest. Deposing a dictator who we believed had WMD's, (and certainly DID have
them, and used them just a few years earlier), and who yearns to control the entire middle east's
oil production, with a much smaller cost, *was* in our best interest.
>
> Iraq has a small,
> > Korean War era military.
>
> It had been promoted as the largest military in the Middle East, and larger than all except the
> US, Russia, and China.
I believe it is the biggest in the Middle East (with the possible exception of Iran), but where
did you see the claim that it was the 4th largest in the world? I believe that spot belongs to
North Korea.
>
> NK has a modern army
> larger than that of the
> > US.
>
> Really? How modern can their military be?
Much more than Iraq's: they have long range missiles and nuclear weapons. Their total military
strength is not as high as that of the US, but the army is bigger than the active-duty US army.
>
> >> If you paid attention to the build-up to this war, the reason for war kept shifting. First it
> >> was a link to Bin Laden and his merry band, then when
> >
> > I never heard that as a reason from the administration, as far as I can recall. Links to
> > terrorism in general, yes (which have found some supporting evidence, IIRC), but not to Al
> > Qaeda.
>
> No? Then why the tie-in to 9/11?
I don't recall hearing one, except for what it did for the country's mood and willingness to be
aggressive. I may be mis-remembering though.
--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!
REAL programmers write self-modifying code.
