From today's San Francisco Chronicle, expressing nostalgia for George McGovern's close-but-no-cigar bid for the White House
Some argue that a U.S.-led pre-emptive strike [on Iraq] without something resembling full international backing will seriously damage the country's moral standing and make it harder to persuade other countries not to act on their own.Uh, if Pakistan wants to attack India, they will do so, as they did in 1971, without any consideration for the U.S. "moral stature". On the other hand, if we step back and allow Saddam to remain in power, what kind of message would that send Pakistan about U.S. resolve and the likelihood that the U.S. would intervene to prevent them from attacking India? Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 15, 2003 01:14 PM"What is going to stop Pakistan from invading India when they feel threatened," said former Sen. George McGovern, whose opposition to the Vietnam War was the linchpin of his unsuccessful 1972 bid for the presidency. "It weakens our moral stature."
McGovern's bid for the White House wasn't close. But still no cigar.
I think one of the strongest arguments for military action to overthrow Saddam is the message that "containment" will send to North Korea, et al: Do whatever you please. The UN can be rolled and the U.S. can't act without the UN.
Posted by: Joanne Jacobs on February 15, 2003 10:32 PM