|
3-11-2003
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 the UN!
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
|
