Aaaargh! - I have avoided this subject for as long as I have felt able because I suspect my views do not match those of the majority of people who read this blog. But, at the risk of being ostracised by everyone who I know reads this (I've visited both their blogs and they're firmly anti-war), I have to say that I believe that there is a case for war against Iraq.
I'm bringing up 3 kids at the moment and I know what happens when you continually make empty threats and/or back down from promised punishments. Sharon constantly threatens to withhold privileges from Chloe & James but rarely follows it up and now they both know that they can effectively ignore her attempts at discipline. Conversely, they know that if I threaten to ground them or remove the TV then I will do it.
Iraq has not defied just a single UN resolution. Iraq has not hidden weapons of mass destruction for just a few months. A total of 11 UN resolutions have been violated and ignored over a period of 13 years. That's 11 times the world has told Iraq to give up its weapons and 11 times Iraq has refused. Each and every time the UN and the world has backed off from taking any serious action about it. And rightly so, violence should be absolutely the last resort.
So where do you draw the line? When do you finally say "Enough is enough". Will one more UN resolution really make that much difference? If we send more UN inspectors will they be any more effective?
"But!" I hear you cry, "The UN inspectors have not found any weapons." True enough. But Iraq has not been completely open, has not been proactive in supplying answers to questions and has been deliberately obstructive. If, as they say, Iraq has nothing to hide then why are they making it so difficult to look. They have military secrets they say. Really? Are they important enough to provoke a full scale invasion for? Probably only if admitting to them is as bad as hiding them.
Issues as divisive as this also highlight the biggest problem with organisations like NATO and the UN. As with any organisation, the bigger it gets the harder it is to reach a consensus on any issue. Once you get to a critical mass you will completely fail to get anything achieved at all. Both the EU and The Commonwealth have stumbled across the same problem when trying to decide what actions to take against Zimbabwe. There are enough dissenters against most forms of action that a virtual impasse has been reached and president Mugabe has got away with his actions relatively scott-free.
I don't wish for a conflict, I am one of the least violent people I know (at least amongst my male acquaintances) but if we take no action then we risk giving free reign to those who would oppose our way of life.
that's a nice rock!
me:
sex:male
age:30
status:married
children:3
Listening:
Barry Diston:Unreleased Stuff
Reading:
Weblogs
Terry Pratchett
Maps
Watching:
Bugger all at the mo, to be honest
reach me
my other sites
recommended
