NEWS IN
BRIEF
Fathers Wiser than Sons.
Extending the war into Iraq would have incurred
incalculable human and political costs. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule
Iraq. The coalition would
instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting in anger and other allies pulling
out as well. Exceeding the U.N.'s mandate would have destroyed the precedent of
international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the
invasion route, the U.S. could still be an
occupying power in a bitterly hostile land.
From ‘Why We Didn't
Remove Saddam’
by George Bush [Sr.]
and Brent Scowcroft, Time Magazine, 1998
Prove You’re not Hiding a Blue Button with Red Beads on it.
[There is] sheer illogic of asking the accused
to prove a negative. That the United States was forcing Saddam
to prove that he did not have weapons of mass destruction was unprecedented.
Let’s simplify this by using a different
analogy: I accuse you of having the
capacity to lay an egg. Legally, it is
incumbent on me, the accuser, to prove this claim. Most definitely it would be odd for me to lay
that claim, and then make you prove that you don’t in fact lay eggs.
From ‘Why are
Americans and Iraqis Dying?’
by Maha Zimmo at
//theunjustmedia.com
In a
War Waged by Democracies, we are all to Blame.
But we are all moral cowards when it comes to Iraq. Our collective inability to summon the
requisite shame and rage when confronted by an estimate of 100,000 dead Iraqi
civilians in the prosecution of an illegal and unjust war not only condemns us,
but adds credibility to those who oppose us.
The fact that a criminal such as Osama bin Laden can broadcast a videotape
on the eve of the US presidential election in which his message is viewed by
many around the world as a sober argument in support of his cause is the
harshest indictment of the failure of the US and Britain to implement sound
policy in the aftermath of 9/11.
From ‘The war on Iraq has made moral
cowards of us all’
by Scott Ritter. Guardian,
Monday November 1st, 2004.