Many have worried that as military action in Iraq becomes more and more inevitable, that our troops will find themselves
mired in another quagmire similar to what happened in Vietnam. Despite that alarmist view about the American troops and what
they may encounter in the Iraqi desert, it is our national leaders who have gotten caught in a quagmire of political posturing
on a global scale as a result of the ineffectiveness of the UN Security Council.
Why did some in the administration feel we needed the support of the UN? There are several reasons for this which range
from using the diplomatic bravado of UN resolutions to cull allies, to ending the malicious labeling of the President by the
Left in America as being a cowboy. The reality of the situation is that we really dont need the UN, especially when it comes
to matters of national security or our war on terror.
Before some of you start the Iraq hasnt done anything to us or Iraq isnt a threat to our national security mantras, answer
this question. Was former president Clinton concerned about national security, in the same manner as it weighs on the heart
of President Bush, when he unilaterally sent our troops into Kosovo or Bosnia? Did those countries do something to us of which
Im not aware?
Trying to separate the war on terror and our national security in a post 9-11 America would do little more than ask to
be attacked again which is exactly what happened during the Nineties after the World Trade Center was attacked the first time
and little was done about it or the attacks on our US Embassies or the USS Cole. All perpetrated by the same group, headed
by the same figure who was offered to president Clinton by the Sudanese, but he turned them down instead.
Attorney General Ashcroft said that aiding and abetting or harboring a terrorist without turning them in to the authorities
also makes those people terrorists, thereby making them a part of the war on terror. When Saddam Hussein allowed a top member
of al quaeda to receive medical treatment in Iraq and then let him go, he instantly put himself in the spotlight of Americas
war on terror. That is all the link thats needed to connect Iraq with al quaeda.
Yet some still feel we have not set enough of a precedent for the removal of Saddam and the subsequent liberation of the
Iraqi people. They feel we will lose global stature if every member of the UN doesnt stand with us when the decision is made
to start military action. These people never consider if that was true, wed already have lost stature in the global community
when we unilaterally attacked Iraq in 1998 with a bombing raid ordered by president Clinton without notice to or support from
Hans Blix, France, Jimmy Carter and the Hollywood Left postulate that containment is the best policy for the Iraqi situation.
Thats exactly why President Bush doesnt need to listen to these people. North Korea is viewed as being the greatest threat
to the planet now that they have nuclear weapons. Even more horrific than the reality that, with the help of Jimmy Carter,
we gave them the money, plans, and materials to become nuclear capable is the fact that they did so under the watchful eyes
of inspectors using the misguided ruse of containment!
The same people who endlessly expropriate billions of our tax dollars to countries who hate America, waste billions on
corporate welfare, and failing socialist programs admonish the Bush administration over the cost of a war with Iraq. Does
anybody really believe we can put a price tag on freedom, after everything weve been through?
Lee P. Butler