Third Superpower

« Palestinians and Saddam | Main | Putin Positions »

Ceasefire Terms

Authored by Michael Pate on April 28th, 2003 at 4:20 PM

“The complaint about back-door rationales is a fair point, as far as it goes. But it fails on two counts: in the first place, the Bush administration never rested its case for war solely on the WMD issue; and in the second place, the pro-war majority didn’t, either. To accuse the Bush administration of lying, though, doesn’t pass the sniff test. The fact that no WMDs have been found so far — and even if we never find them — doesn’t mean that the administration lied. In order to prove they lied, you need evidence that the administration knew there were no WMDs, but went ahead with that rationale anyway. Further, given that the Security Council unanimously agreed that Iraq had not met its disarmament obligations (i.e., unanimously approved resolution 1441), to accuse the Bush administration of lying is to also accuse the French, Germans, Russians, et al of lying. Even further, the sanctions against Iraq would have been predicated on a lie, which would mean that Bill Clinton and Kofi Annan were lying, too. To my mind the most powerful justification for war has always been the ceasefire that ended the first Gulf War in 1991.” - Brett Cashman

Links in this entry:

But there are no WMDs!

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?


TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.patetech.info/cgi-bin/mt/mt-doubleback.cgi/30
Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional .:. Valid CSS .:. Valid RSS
Design by Book of Styles .:. Technorati: Web Services for bloggers .:. Movable Type .:. Pate Technologies .:. Creative Commons License