Safire at his creative worst:
No; the opponents of this genocidal maniac's removal now accuse President Bush and Prime Minister Blair of a colossal hoax. Because Saddam didn't use germs or gas on our troops, they say, that proves Iraq never had them. If we cannot find them right away, they don't exist. They believe Saddam sacrificed tens of billions in oil revenues for no reason at all.
...
When weighing the murky evidence of an aggressive tyranny's weapons, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair were obliged to take no chances. The burden on proof was on Saddam. By his contempt, he invited invasion; by its response, the coalition established the credibility of its resolve. There was no "intelligence hoax."
Tell me, Mr. Safire, if Saddam had wanted to keep those billions in oil revenues, what would he have done? Maybe allowed UN inspectors to return, and given them access to anyplace they wanted to go? Maybe he would have told the world that he no longer had any WMD's? Sure Saddam was a very bad guy, but unless and until real WMD's are found, it appears that there was nothing he could have done to stop the Blair-Bush project. Unless those weapons are found, insisting that Saddam disarm was an impossible demand. Even if weapons are found, the invasion was still a clear violation of international law; the coalition established its contempt for law and the world--nothing else.
No; the opponents of this genocidal maniac's removal now accuse President Bush and Prime Minister Blair of a colossal hoax. Because Saddam didn't use germs or gas on our troops, they say, that proves Iraq never had them. If we cannot find them right away, they don't exist. They believe Saddam sacrificed tens of billions in oil revenues for no reason at all.
...
When weighing the murky evidence of an aggressive tyranny's weapons, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair were obliged to take no chances. The burden on proof was on Saddam. By his contempt, he invited invasion; by its response, the coalition established the credibility of its resolve. There was no "intelligence hoax."
Tell me, Mr. Safire, if Saddam had wanted to keep those billions in oil revenues, what would he have done? Maybe allowed UN inspectors to return, and given them access to anyplace they wanted to go? Maybe he would have told the world that he no longer had any WMD's? Sure Saddam was a very bad guy, but unless and until real WMD's are found, it appears that there was nothing he could have done to stop the Blair-Bush project. Unless those weapons are found, insisting that Saddam disarm was an impossible demand. Even if weapons are found, the invasion was still a clear violation of international law; the coalition established its contempt for law and the world--nothing else.
<< Home