A case against Iraq

The land war against Iraq during the Persian Gulf War of 1991 was barely three days old when U.S. Army divisions began to route the feared Republican Guard deep inside Iraq. Meanwhile, coalition forces destroyed a long convoy of Iraqi troops retreating from Kuwait under pressure from allied ground forces.

It turned into a turkey shoot. U.S. air forces laid waste to Iraq’s occupying army as it left Kuwait for safety within its own borders. The aftermath revealed it to be the “Highway of Death” a visual monument to Saddam Hussein’s ruthless military ambitions.

Hussein, who could have easily been deposed if the allies had marched on Baghdad, has for 12 years used the bureaucratic appeasement of the United Nations to avoid laying down his arms. He kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998 and only strong war talk by the United States restored their presence within Iraq. Of course, Saddam would not have let these conspicuous U.N. convoys back into his country if he were not confident nothing would be found.

Secretary of State Colin Powell gave proof to the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday, that Iraq is deceiving inspectors as they comb the countryside in search of biological and chemical weapons. The truth is, Saddam does not want to disarm and won’t unless forced to do so, as Powell eloquently said Wednesday.

Still, the United Nations refuses to even put up a united front in condemning Saddam’s evasive response to inspection teams. A large amount of dangerous weapons are still unaccounted for and Saddam confronts the world with a “just try and find ’em” attitude.

Instead of support, some of America’s oldest allies are thinking of new reasons to appease Saddam. This includes:

War will prompt Saddam to use chemical or biological weapons on allied soldiers or civilians in neighboring countries. This notion cancels out the argument by those who contend Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction.

This is a war about oil. That might be true, but only when you apply it to two of the loudest opponents of war France and Russia. France has longtime business interests in Iraqi oil and Russia has oil and oil exploration deals pending. War and regime change in Iraq would complicate things for France, Russia and other nations dealing with Saddam. This includes North Korea and China who are all too willing to sell Iraq missiles and other military technology.

War will put the West at risk of further terrorism. This is a defeatist argument by people who still don’t realize that the folks who brought us Sept. 11 and other acts of mass terrorism declared war on the West long ago we just never acknowledged their declaration. Shying away from military action because of terrorism concerns is proof that terrorism works.

The U.N. resolution requires that Iraq disarm or face serious consequences.

Iraq has not disarmed and the consequences of further U.N. inaction will be serious.