Did Powell Prove It?

Tim Cavanaugh's take on Colin Powell's speech is up on the home page.

Comments

[Kevin Carson]

Robert:

Apparently, crushing the U.S. national security state's entire Christmas list of enemies helps us get to that goal--to hear the Bush admin talk, anyway. They've been using 9-11 to sell what they wanted to do regardless of any so-called war on terror. Just like they used "communism" and "narcotrafficking" to sell the same policies before. I've been listing to what the war on terror "is about." Just because I've been listening doesn't mean the people in the Dumb W. Ass administration who've been talking aren't a bunch of god-damned liars.

Where are YOU from--FrontPage, The Weekly Standard, or NRO?

[Xmas]

Our half-completed attack on Iraq in 1991 resulted in us leaving soldiers and bases in Saudi Arabia which resulted in angry Islamic Fundementalists which resulted in easy recruiting for Islamic Terror Groups. US Foreign Policy has supported repressive regimes or vile revolutionaries as long as it furthered some grand scheme of ours. We can easily point at some international troublespots and see the groundwork laid out by US policies of the past. On the other hand, we can also point to the peaceful places of the world and see the same. It is the curse of being a super-power. We meddle and sometimes we get stung.

Saudi Arabia is one of Islam's holy lands and it is easy to see why religious fundementalist would be angry at the US for stationing troops there. Protecting Saudi Arabia and Kuwait from Saddam Hussein is the main reason why we have troops there. By causing this furor over Hussein the US government is forcing the situation so that we can either get rid of Hussein for good or be told by the house of Saud that we are no longer welcome. Both situations wind up in US soldiers leaving that section of the Middle East. Which, by any means, is a good thing.

However, as of right now, Hussein is still in power and the Saudi government hasn't kicked us off their land, which means the US needs to keep agitating the situation by beating our chests and calling out the misdeeds of Mr. Hussein. In the end, I am hoping that Saddam will step down from power and put himself into exile. But that is just wishful thinking on my part.

I'm stating my wild hopes here but I really don't know if there will be a real war at all. Saddam's army is too tightly controlled from the top and his defenses may not be strong enough to protect him from immediately being neutralized (if not killed at least silenced). If he is neutralized in the first moments of any war, Iraqi forces may be too paralyzed to properly react to any threats or too disloyal to any new leadership to stay cohesive.

[Xmas]

Hey, I'm still on the fence.

Of course, I thought this whole "Let's go to war with Iraq" thing was just a pretense to force the hands of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. I was hoping Bush was trying to get them to either deal with Saddam or to tell the US they couldn't attack from their countries. Either would allow the US to pull out our troops and close down those bases that anger the Islamic terror groups.

Well, Kuwait and the house of Saud have done neither so far, so that means the US needs to keep waving it's big stick around.

[Robert Speirs]

Avoiding "Angering Islamic terror groups" is now the keystone of American foreign policy? Where are you from? France? The War on Terror, in case you haven't been listening, is about CRUSHING "Islamic terror groups". Has something to do with something that happened a year ago last September. Crushing Iraq helps us get to that goal. Just watch.

[Latman Jane]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 82.146.43.155
URL: http://www.penis-pill-enlargement.com
DATE: 02/28/2004 12:09:43
I am a hobo in the house of the lord.