Well, there you go.

or that he's standing up to the tyranny of the West?

No, this is what he tells people is the truth. It ain't tyrany if you beat the snot out of someone for starting a war of agression. That'd be like saying that Germany was subject to allied tyrany after WW2.

Now the IRAQI PEOPLE are being punished for the mistakes of the West. Justice?

Of course not. This is why we should kick him out of office, as suggested.

How exactly do you propose kicking him out of office? There's an Executive Order prohibiting the US from assassinating another nation's leader. And we don't have the support to build up a military presense in the Gulf to invade again.

And in case you forget, we did ARM him! And then we armed the resistance groups during the Gulf War -- and abandoned them. The fault with Saddam being in power resides completely with George Bush and the coalition. There's nothing we can do about taking him out now -- the time to do that was in '91.

"Rule of Consent" basicly means that the vast numbers of ordinary citizens could overwhelm the military. If you'll notice, I did say a lot of them would be killed. Granted, "Rule of Consent" came about in an age when the military was armed with swords and shields. However, you'll notice that it was the ordinary soldiers in the Soviet army who turned the tide during the coup against Gorbachev, siding with the citizens. It's very possible the same could happen in Iraq if there was an uprising.

BUT, the people aren't likely to see Saddam as anything but a good guy as long as he can blame the sanctions for the horrible living conditions. After all, the way he tells it, he's just standing up to the tyranny of the West.

So, it's pretty pointless to talk about taking him out. While it can be done (in the simple manner that it probably wouldn't be too hard to do if we could figure out where he was and send in a guided missile or five), it still is impossible to do as such would create a huge international incident aimed squarely at the US, the UK, and probably Israel. Also, it would give those Islamic fundamentalists a whole NEW reason to want to blow us to pieces.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
****
"The candidate who slimed John McCain in the primaries and smeared Al Gore in the general election is now the president who pledges to elevate the nation's tone and bring civility to our discorse. Kind of like Michael Corleone brought peace to the mob by killing the heads of the other four families."
--Paul Begala, Is Our Children Learning?

We can fix that... *erase erase*
Or, of course, somebody smart could hire an unsanctioned, the-secretary-disavows-all-knowledge-of-your-existence individual/s to handle it.

The problem with releasing the sanctions is that it's NOT going to make Saddam look any worse in his people's eyes if they suddenly start getting fed, because he'll just tell them that he WON! (Since he told them he beat the coalition army after his butt-kicking back in '91, he'l probably tell them Iraq has conquered the Earth, or something.) And they'll support him more for standing tall all that time.

People, y'see, are dumb that way.

Oh, and since someone mentioned 'diversionary tactics' and 'wag the dog,' let's recall in our textbooks the attack on the pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan, which turned out to be making only aspirin, and the odd timing to coincide with Monica's hitting the front page.
Didja know the previous administration quietly paid the owner of the factory all he needed to rebuild after the attack? (Except for the people who got fragged, of course.)

I mean, we can SHOW that the Iraqi radar was locking on planes. But nobody EVER showed that that plant was making chemical weapons. So which is more dog-wagging?

------------------
"My knowledge and experience far exceeds your own, by, oh, about a BILLION times!" -- Q

If Saddam is assassinated, the US/UK will get the blame (even if we weren't involved). Face it, folks, the only time it would've been possible to take him out was during the Gulf War. The Gulf War is now over, and he's going to be staying in power no matter what we do about it.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
****
"The candidate who slimed John McCain in the primaries and smeared Al Gore in the general election is now the president who pledges to elevate the nation's tone and bring civility to our discorse. Kind of like Michael Corleone brought peace to the mob by killing the heads of the other four families."
--Paul Begala, Is Our Children Learning?

[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited February 20, 2001).]

"That'd be like saying that Germany was subject to allied tyrany after WW2."

*cough*East Germany*cough*

Say if a lone assasin, a Rambo, if you will, manages to Pop a cap in the back o' Mr. Husayn's head, what good will that serve?

"Hooray! Saddam Husayn is dead! Tyranny is over!

What? The Military's still in charge of the country, and Saddam's Son, Uday (the same man who was apparently sadistic enough to have his Soccer team's feet whipped after they lost, mind you) is now the highest Military official, as declared by Husayn's posthumous orders? And Uday is followed by Hikmat Azzizi, Ahmed Salih (Think bin Laden. But worse), Arshad Zibari , Sadi Abbas & Myasta Zivvi?

Well, better get started on those 900 some assasination attempts then."

Even your US State Department realizes that for every Iraqi Saddam Husayn, three are lurking in the shadows.

The US/Iraq policy by the State Department is outlined here.

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

We should help THEM get rid of Hussein and Co. and install a more democratic government, by whatever means possible. This is where Bush Sr. really dropped the ball. Although possibly he learned a bit about US-backed puppet governments from CIA days. (Pinochet, anyone?)

The problem with that is that whatever regime overthrows Saddam will probably, at least in the beginning, have to be almost as despotic as he was to retain control. Although possibly not, if they're smart, and do such things as giving the Kurds a bit more autonomy (and ceasing trying to wipe them out would probably be a good start.)

Any Governmental change in Iraq will ultimately be of the Iraqis own volition. Has a foreign-enforced, non colony Government ever worked? I can't recall any offhand. Either the people do something, or one of the next Dictators decides to change it.

No, I think that the US needs to realize, that despite the fact that conditions are indeed awful over there, there's nothing the Americans do to change it.

(Although, I'm wondering if a sanction lifing will actually help the people at least a little bit. Of course, Husayn will hoarde all the good stuff, and so on, he'd play it as a Propaganda victory, and to even further cement his popular opinion, he'd share, albiet very little of, the newfound resources. But the people would still get more.)

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

Post-WWII West Germany and Japan. But that required:

1. Bombing the respective countries to smithereens.
2. An ocupying force.
and 3. The occupiers rebuilding the country to pretty much where it was before, or farther.

Now we are advocating assassination as a means of foreign policy!! Not only will that increase our our ability to be arrogant and self-righteous all over the world, but damned if it won't take foreign policy back to the 50's.

Can anyone say CIA assassinations?

But this, oh this...thing, this quote, is the icing on the cake:

quote:

---

We just say, "We declare Sadaam Housein to be out of power. Your new government will be based around the US Constitution. Democratic elections will be held one month from today. Anyone may run for office, except any member of the Housein family. Resistance is futile.

---

Aside from the delicious fact that you turned the United States into the Borg to accomplish your goals of spreading US hegemony around the world, you want to, and get this, turn Iraq into a constututional republic by force using the United States Constitution as a model. That is grand!

We had better change the preamble of which to read:

quote:

---

We the people of the United States in order to secure the blessings of cheap oil for ourselves and our posterity, do declare all bad people holding large oil reserves to be bad and subject to our mighty wrath.

---

At which point we impose our "freedom loving" Constitution on them and have them shot in the head.

Leaving all the rest of the dictators in the world to their own devices because they have no oil deposits.

1. Bombing anything is bad PR, and people get upset at explosions on CNN. Approval rating slips.
2. With all your cutbacks, do you even have enough personnel to maintain your reserves? Plus, people get upset at military involvement in anything, and the fact that you're not worrying about America as much as you're worrying about Not-America. Approval Rating slips.
3. Helping less fortunate Iraqis find proper home, food, and shelter is not as important as American interests, like making sure your Christian charity funds are funded up, and that Yellowston national park should have no pollution. Approval rating slips.

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

Exactly as I said. Simply say, "OK, Saddam is no longer in office. Elections will be held." Crush him if he resists. Who needs to kill him? Let him sit in his little bunker and give orders. Who cares? And there's also the idea of simply revoking the executive order that prevents us from shooting him with another executive order. OR, we could have him indicted and brought before a war crimes tribunal for his actions against the Kurds, and when he doesn't show, go in and get him. There are all manner of possibilities.

I've personally always liked Clancy's "Ryan Doctrine". It said that if you, as a chief of state, start a war of agression, not only will we destroy your army, you, personally, are now fair game. To demonstrate as he was making this announcement, he had a live satelite feed displayed of a smart bomb blowing up the Ayatolah's resdence.

"Rule of Consent" basicly means that the vast numbers of ordinary citizens could overwhelm the military.

And thus it doesn't apply to this situation. The people over there have no weapon better than a pitchfork. This is against chemical and biological weapons. I seriously doubt that that whacko would have any problem with wiping out half his country.

Also, it would give those Islamic fundamentalists a whole NEW reason to want to blow us to pieces.

You mean like those in Iran? The ones that want to kill the guy anyway?

Has a foreign-enforced, non colony Government ever worked?

West Germany. Japan, IIRC.

*reads next post*

Oh, well, Rob beat me to that, didn't he? Darn you!

Leaving all the rest of the dictators in the world to their own devices because they have no oil deposits.

They haven't started wars of agression against us or our allies. We beat the snot out of their military, and thus effectively own Iraq, and can do whatever we darned well please with it. Please, I really would love to see N. Korea try to invade S. Korea, just so we can have an excuse to oust THAT guy. Minus the loss of life required, of course.

quote:

---

Simply say, "OK, Saddam is no longer in office. Elections will be held." Crush him if he resists. Who needs to kill him? Let him sit in his little bunker and give orders. Who cares? And there's also the idea of simply revoking the executive order that prevents us from shooting him with another executive order. OR, we could have him indicted and brought before a war crimes tribunal for his actions against the Kurds, and when he doesn't show, go in and get him. There are all manner of possibilities.

---

Never before have I read a quote which exemplifies ignorance, unwarranted nationalism and the experience of living in a make-believe fantasy world* such as this. I commend you Omega, for either wasting a chunk of my non-important life, or for showing me first hand what dementia can do to someone.

* aside from 99.999999999999999% of ANY type of fan-fiction out there. Sex with Starscream? For fuck sakes.

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

Essentially, you want us to invade Iraq, 'cuz that's the only way I could see us "declaring free elections."

Do you honestly think this stuff is possible? And people call me irrational.

Oh, yeah ... the Ryan Doctrine is ... FICTION! It's about as realistic as thinking that Dr. Henry Jones was a real honest to god archeologist.

It's even better that you like to talk about military actions but feel squeamish about the loss of life. People die, Omega, by the hundreds and thousands. War is bad for precisely that reason. And your plan of operation against Iraq would cost lives -- American, British, Israeli, etc.

And as much as Iran might dislike Iraq, I think they hate the US more.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 6.27 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with four eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
****
"The candidate who slimed John McCain in the primaries and smeared Al Gore in the general election is now the president who pledges to elevate the nation's tone and bring civility to our discorse. Kind of like Michael Corleone brought peace to the mob by killing the heads of the other four families."
--Paul Begala, Is Our Children Learning?