top bar
QuickTopic free message boards logo
Skip to Messages

TOPIC:

Threat? What threat?

3
Rob McNair-HuffPerson was signed in when posted
02-25-2003
09:25 AM ET (US)
Billy and Martin,

Thanks for the comments. Yes, one tyrant at a time. I can agree with that. I just believe we are choosing the wrong tyrant if the true desire is to control threats. Of course, arguably it is the Bush Administration and the speech more than a year ago where Cowboy George choose to single out North Korea of one leg of the Axis of Evil that set up this current hostility.

Martin hits it on the head though. Although the Bush Administration tries to argue against the point vehemently, the war with Iraq IS about oil. It is about padding the pockets of Bush supporters in the oil industry, who are licking their chops at the prospect of taking greater control of the oil fields in Iraq. There are many problems with this strategy though, not the least of which is that while supposedly going after Saddam to remove his potential for developing weapons of mass destruction then the Bush Administration is ignoring greater threats that exist right now. The U.S. stubborn refusal to open direct talks with North Korea holds the potential to create a much more potent showdown in the North Pacific...
2
Billy
02-25-2003
09:07 AM ET (US)
One tyrant at a time Rob, one tyrant at a time.
1
Martin
02-25-2003
07:35 AM ET (US)
North Korea actually shows us why it is important to disarm Iraq now, before they gain Nuclear or effective chemical weapons. Once the Iraqis have such weapons it will be very much more difficult to deal with Saddam. The stance adopted by the US in relation to North Korea reflects the much greater risks associated with a war there. So, the issue is not which is the greater threat now, but what threat will they represent in five, ten or fifteen years time. Because of the instability of the region and the oil wealth in Iraq, I would say that they are more of a worry than North Korea, which is poor, swamped by its neighbour China and will therefore probably collapse without intervention.

Print | RSS Views: 1313 (Unique: 553 ) / Subscribers: 0 | What's this?