VAnity - A little help responding to Anti War (Bush) email

DAVID BROOKS: I just want somebody to say to those people and I wanted to go down there and say here's a regime that has professional rape teams in their military where they rape women and send the videotapes to the fathers. Here's a regime that imprisons mothers and babies in the next cell and forces them to watch their babies starve to death. You know, what is the defense? Maybe we don't want to take out this regime, but is that the moral high ground? What is your defense for preserving that regime?

"More than ever, I think we ought to act in concert with other nations. "

This one's easy. We already are in concert with other nations. It's only France and Germany out of 15 Security Council members that have the slightest doubt in our multilateral course.

13 out of 15 isn't bad, with the only two against already completely neutered as world powers.

1. We need to learn from our past: In 1938 Adolf Hitler marched into the Sudetenland and the Allies did nothing to stop him.The allies particularly France, Italy and the UK ceded the Sudetenland to Germany in what was the infamous pact called the "Munich Pact". It was signed by Neville Chamberlin on behalf of the UK, France and Italy and when Chamberlin returned home to the UK he proclaimed that we had "peace in our time". That was in 1938 and war broke out in 1939! We now know from the German archives that (1) Hitler had given the command to retreat if there was any opposition at all from any of the allies, (2) the German soldiers were unarmed and had no ammunition for their guns or tanks, (3) The German generals opposed the move. The Allies acquiesced and Hitler won his bluff. Allied appeasement began world War II since Hitler was convinced he could pretty much do what he wanted and the Allies would not fight!

2. Iraq is violating a deal it made not only with the U.S. but with the United Nations as well. The issue is about the ability to wage war in the future and nothing else.

3. Iraq is producing atomic weapons, biological weapons and poisonous gas which both Iraq and Iran used in their little 6 year hassle together. WMD are not defensive weapons, they are offensive weapons.

4. You cannot keep the peace if you refuse to stand and fight, otherwise everybody and his brother will call your bluff. You are then faced with MONUMENTAL CHALLENGES to your position which becomes a nightmare as did World War II!Appeasement begets war and not peace. From what we are able to gather from Japanese archives regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor it appears that the top Japanese military and politicians were absolutely convinced that we would cave and not fight!

Revised from source: http://www.rinfret.com/iraq.html

Ask him if he needs to see the tongues cut from the mouths of Saddam's enemies? Ask him if he wants to talk to the raped women. Ask if he wants to talk with the parents who were forced into false confessions because their children were being tortured. Ask him if he's ever heard of what Hitler did, and if he knows about Saddam's admiration for Hitler.

And, furthermore ask him if he knows the names of the nations who ARE with us?

Here ARE the 17 ALLIES for IRAQI FREEDOM

U.S., British, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Polish, Italy, Portugal, Slovakia, Denmark, Czech, Spanish, Quatar, Kuwaiti, Israeli, Australian and Japanese

I don't see that SH is any more of a threat now than he was 5 years ago.

Five years ago and today are like comparing the depression years of the 1930's with the 1950's. Today we are faced with terrorism and the knowledge that terrorists have actually hit our country and killed thousands of people. They continue to threaten us with further acts of murder and mayhem. The potential for another attack is serious and most likely not preventable.

The President's justification was all old news; not enough to justify a pre-emptive strike.

We've had successes in rounding up some terrorist cells, but there most likely are others. Some think the OKC bombing is terrorist related to the mid-east as well, but that is open to question at this point in time. The point is, today Saddam wants to destroy the USA. He has attempted to kill former President Bush when he visited Kuwait. He possibly holds an American pilot as a POW to this day and his daily threats to the USA show contempt for the UN resolution 1441 that requires him to disarm his WMD's and turn over all related materials to the UN inspectors.

Plus, I believe that peoples and nations have the right to determine their own destiny, free from military coercion by great powers--even the US.

Iraqi people do not control their own destiny. Hussein controls it. It's a dictatorship. The people of Iraq have no more power at the moment to determine their own destiny than a newborn infant does.

Saddam murders those that he mistrusts or who dare to disagree with him. Under those circumstances no people are free to decide how they want to live their lives and who they want to run their country. They have no say so. If you believe what you say, then they must be rid of Saddam.

Also, I sincerely hope to see the UN succeed as a world body.

Why should we let a bunch of unelected globocrats dictate our foreign policy? Secondly, Hussain got his arse kicked in 1991-92, agreed to certain rules -set by the UN - and he has not obeyed that agreement. It is Hussein that has made a mockery of the UN --- he refuses to do what they mandate.

To date, Iraq has failed to do so and shown they have no intention of doing so. They are trying and so far succeeding in playing hide and seek with the inspectors. This isn't what is required of them. They are required to turn the materials and WMD's over to the inspectors for destruction. They are and have been in violation of Resolution 1441 since day 1.

Look what happened when the League of Nations failed.
The UN may well go the way of the League of Nations and if they continue to be as ineffective as they have been and are showing themselves to be, then that may not be a bad thing at all.

The USA cannot allow other countries that have their own interests decide the future of America. Those countries balking at the USA going to war with Iraq have financial interests such a Iraq oweing Russia over $6 billion, or the trade that France and Germany have with Iraq.

More than ever, I think we ought to act in concert with other nations.
As far as working with other nations in the world, we are doing just that. We sought out their opinions and with the help of countries in the UN (France included), the UN prepared Res 1441. Everyone voted on it and approved it.

Now that it has been shown by Iraq that they have no intention of living up to 1441, France, Germany, Russia and China don't want to follow through on the resolution they helped write and voted for in the first place.

So, we already are in concert with other nations. It's only France and Germany out of 15 Security Council members that have the slightest doubt in our multilateral course.

Here ARE the 17 ALLIES for IRAQI FREEDOM :

U.S., British, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Polish, Italy, Portugal, Slovakia, Denmark, Czech, Spanish, Quatar, Kuwaiti, Israeli, Australian and Japanese.

As for pre-emptive strike and UN approval these petition groups were nowhere in Kosovo or on attacking Serbia who never did anything against the US, period. President Clinton got no UN approval and we now occupy that area and have no exit strategy Where were these Anti war movement then . They are just anti BUSH, and that is pathetic!

You cannot keep the peace if you refuse to stand and fight, otherwise everybody and his brother will call your bluff. You are then faced with MONUMENTAL CHALLENGES to your position which becomes a nightmare as did World War II! Appeasement begets war and not peace. From what we are able to gather from Japanese archives regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor it appears that the top Japanese military and politicians were absolutely convinced that we would cave and not fight!