Scott Ritter, confronting the theocracy of evil

[G_j]

CONFRONTING THE THEOCRACY OF EVIL
Scott Ritter, AlterNet

The reason for the collective failure to accurately assess Iraq's WMD capability is a dangerous mindset that puts faith before fact.

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17769

Feb 5

In early November, 2003, I found myself engaged in a series of meetings with members of the British Parliament on the issue of Iraqi WMD.

"I, of course, was against the war," opined Michael Meacher, a Labor MP and former environmental minister who resigned his position in protest of Prime Minister Blair's Iraq policy. "While I view Saddam as a menace, Blair simply had not made a case sufficient to support military action."

Meacher had gained an unlikely ally in fellow Labor MP Andrew Mackinlay, a leading member of the Select Committee of Foreign Affairs who had voted in favor of the war, but had recently come to question that decision. "We need to know the truth about Iraq's WMD," he told me. "We haven't gotten to the bottom of this one yet."

Others were less skeptical. The Chair of the Select Committee on Defense, Bruce George, listened patiently as I took apart Tony Blair's case for Iraq's retention of WMD, piece by piece, in the back of the Member's cafeteria. When I finished, George shrugged his shoulders.

"I still believe that this war was justified over the issue of WMD," he said, "if for no other reason than Saddam's ongoing intent to acquire them in the face of UN inspections."
...more..

[tarheel]

1. You know this is

one of the things that bothers me.

"I still believe that this war was justified over the issue of WMD," he said, "if for no other reason than Saddam's ongoing intent to acquire them in the face of UN inspections."



All along * and his cronies have justified this war upon the fact that Saddam was pursuing, if he did not already have, WMDs. Since when does any country in this world not have the right to pursue whatever defensive capabilities that they choose to ?

We have WMDs, Russia has WMDs, China has WMDs, N. Korea has MWDs, Britain has WMDs, etc... And I am sure that all of these countries have weapons that are every bit as nasty and destructive as the ones that Saddam was pursuing.

I know there are those who will say that the UN had imposed a sanction on his pursuit of WMDs after the Persian Gulf war, but I submit that they had no authority to do so. The UN was well withion it's rights to demand that Iraq withdraw from Kuwait, and cease all hostilities and release any prisoners being held and also not take agressive action in the future.

But, who really believes that the US or Russia or China would abide by a UN demand that we or they destroy our stockpiles of WMDs and submit to inspections. I state that every country has the unalienable right to self defense of its autonomy as long as they do not take agressive action against the autonomy or resources of another nation.

Just something that I have mulled over for the past while.....

[tarheel]

2. And you know as

a side note too... If I remember correctly, it seems to me that one of the justifications that Saddam gave for for invading Kuwait in 1990, was the accusation that Kuwait was engaged in "diagonal drilling" whereby they were drilling wells that started on the Kuwairtt side of the border and ran diagonally under the border into Iraq and were basicaly stealing the oil from Iraq.

I do not know if this is true or not, but anymore, I don't believe a damn thing that our government tells us and Saddam was probably just as likely to be telling the truth at that time as we were. :shrug:

[DevilsAdvocate2]

5. Say it with me, Tarheel...

No war for oil!!! If it applies to the U.S., should it not also apply to Saddam?

[tarheel]

6. I would agree with you

DA, but my assertion is that if what Saddam claimed was true, Iraq had every right to protect their own natural resources. When I say "No war for oil" I mean that the US should not be invading sovereign nations to steal or attempt to control that nation's resources.

I would fully support the US fighting a war if Russia or some other country tried to invade us to drill in ANWAR or Texas or in US waters off the coast of Florida or NC.

[G_j]

4. the only workable way

to approach arms control is for the one most dominant player (the US) to practice what it preaches. The way it stands we do whatever we want then attempt to bully and strong-arm others to not follow our example.

[KharmaTrain]

3. Is Ritter Gonna Be On The McCain Committee???

If this regime wants this investigation to have a shread of credibility, Scott has to be on it. There's no American who knows all the pieces of this puzzle better than Mr. Ritter and other members of the UNSCOM teams from '91-'98 who can prove with "eyes and boots" what was going on.

Of course we know this regime would rather repeal the tax break to the rich or kiss Barney Frank before it would consider Ritter; who it slimed last year when he stood in the wilderness with the truth and said what we all knew then, and the rest of the sheeple are starting to believe, too. McCain will show if he's really in charge or just being "iced" (a great observation here) to keep him from being a loose cannon through the election (I sure hope this scheme backfires the first time McCain runs up against an unfulfilled WH request).

It's also time to stop this crap about "Evil Saddam" as being the reason this country, for the only time it its history, took aggressive action against a nation that never attack it or declared war. The issue here is turning this country into an aggressor nation and setting a precedent for any nation, including our enemies, to use this "doctrine" for their own justifications in future wars and crackdown on their own people. This message just doesn't sink in, yet.