I RECENTLY heard a quote from President George W. H. Bush's Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Jed Babbin, "Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion." As much as we can all appreciate a good joke about France, this sort of idea is exactly what is plaguing the world at the moment. When or if we go to war in Iraq, it will be because of the failures of France, Germany and other such left-leaning nations who refuse to take a tough stand on terrorism. Saddam Hussein does not want a war. Hussein knows that if push comes to shove, the United States will replace him with a tiny, helpful, pro-western democracy. However, Saddam can see light at the end of the tunnel as long as the nations of the world are divided and do not stand up and follow through with their threats.
The United States has made a commitment, starting on Sept. 11, 2001, to make terrorism a very unhealthy, unprofitable occupation. The theory behind the attack on Afghanistan and the entire war on terrorism is that any act of terrorism against the United States will provoke such a guaranteed, large-scale response proving that terrorism is not an effective or worthwhile political tool. Thus far, this theory has been largely successful in preventing further terrorist attacks.
The nations of the world can easily agree that terrorism in general does not solve any problems. But the leaders of the world still refuse to stand up forcibly behind this idea, and thus they tolerate and encourage terrorism. Going to war is never a good thing; however, opposing a war designed to stop the murder of innocents can not be allowed.
With each passing report of the weapons inspectors, the United Nations acts less and less like the United Nations and follows in the footsteps of the ill-fated League of Nations by appeasing a petty, tyrannical and evil dictator, who without hesitation has used chemical weapons on his own people. Both France and Germany seem very anxious to encourage more weapons inspections and give Iraq yet another chance to come clean. They do not seem at all interested in backing up their resolutions with actions, rendering them ineffective.
Iraqi officials have played the part of being oppressed by the evil Western superpower beautifully. They have cooperated just barely enough with the inspectors for some countries to claim that "progress" has been made and with each round of inspections have dangled a new piece of information in front of the U.N. Security Council. Most recently, Iraq has offered access to new scientists who were not in any of the previous records. Truly, it sounds like a bad Fox TV-series: "Iraqi scientists speak out for the first time. Footage you won't see anywhere else." It's amazing that the United Nations falls for this every time when it is exceptionally clear that Iraq is doing all that it can to thwart the weapons inspectors. On multiple occasions, the United States has presented evidence showing that Iraq has been visiting each site with heavy equipment and large trucks in tow before weapons inspectors arrive.
At this point in time, the U.N. Security Council and the world at large have two options. On the one hand, they could continue to be grateful for the little tidbits of information that their buddy Saddam is feeding them on a daily basis. This course of action will eventually leave the responsibility of disarming Iraq to the United States, the sole responsible superpower and policeman of the world. The other alternative is for the United Nations to stand up and unanimously declare that Iraq must disarm. This threat must be backed up by the immediate deployment of a multi-national alliance of armed forces to the Persian Gulf. Only when the world stands united with guns pointed squarely at Hussein's head will he back down.
It seems strange at the end of the day that only the hardest-line stance in this situation can prevent an all-out conflict. However it is clear that a wishy-washy U.N. policy on Iraq only allows Hussein to continue to posses weapons of mass destruction. The deployment of troops to Iraq by a worldwide coalition will not be a popular move. The same group of college students who protest the World Trade Organization, "evil corporations" and globalization each year will show up in their Japanese imports, wearing Nikes and imported Birkenstocks produced in third world countries to protest the evils of the Republican president. However, what must be made clear is that to preserve our way of life and these people's right to protest foolishly, the entire world must stand together firmly with guns pointed at Iraq.
(Daniel Bagley is a Cavalier Daily
viewpoint writer.)
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | YesterdayInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
