Iraqi Cheat Sheet

February 6, 2003  -  Transcribed by Insider  [PetP] Benn Gleck

Glenn’s outline on how to explain the upcoming Iraqi war to all the pinheads!

1. We should send more inspectors!

- Analogize it to your kid caught smoking weed, who denies everything and is defensive and accusatory. At what point do you actually punish the child for smoking weed? Do you just keep hiring babysitters ad nauseam to watch over him? At some point you have to lay down the law and Mean What You Say.

2. There is always time for war: this should be a time for peace and we need more time.

- 12 years is not enough time? How much more time do you need?

- Negotiating and Contracts require a meeting of the minds where both parties come to the table with clean hands. We cannot trust Saddam, he is a proven liar, so it is impossible to work with him.

- Cameras and Inspectors were in North Korea. We waited for them to get in line, and what did it get us? Nukes right up in our face. Do we really want to do this again?

- (See also: Chamberlain, Neville and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact [Nazi-Russian non aggression pact])

3. They weren’t in involved in 9-11!

- We’re not fighting a war against 9-11, this is a war on International Terror, of which 9-11 was only an example. He funds suicide bomber campaigns in Israel, which has been proven.

4. Saddam is only a threat to his own people - Only a threat to his neighbors.

- Sure he is maiming and killing his people, but then Hitler only killed his own Jews.

- Israel is a neighbor, you don’t dismiss her. Saddam funds the suicide bombers that kill Israelis regularly.

- Light of the Arabs, “The sword of Islam” – Saddam is rebuilding Babylon a la Nebuchadnezzar and is trying to unite the “Arab World”. How do you unite the Arab world? Bring them against their common enemy Israel. Also think about this: is radical Islam only a threat to the neighbors or can it easily come over here?

5. Israel gets WMD, we have WMD, we used them, why can’t Saddam have them?

- First ask: Are nuclear weapons ever an appropriate option?

- Yes: Consider World War 2 – the use of Atomic weapons in Japan brought an immediate end to a bloody and costly campaign. Lives were saved by doing so.

- No: This position is against world opinion: Many “sane” and non-belligerent nations have WMD, and nobody thinks this is a problem. We are trying to stop a maniac from getting them and using them.

- As for Israel, they are constantly threatened by belligerent states: they should have them, and further they haven’t used them, and oh yeah there isn’t a stack of binding resolutions against Israel.

6. We’re all alone – we need the world!

- And the world we shall have: 68% of Americans support war as compared to 41% for the earlier conflict.

- This time we have a bigger coalition than last time:
the only thing that stands in our way is the French and Germans

- Last week alone 8 more additions to the roster

- Yesterday: 10 more. Former Iron Curtain states at that.

7. Its only about oil!

Two responses:

- Analyze who is going to gain from the oil glut on the market. Wait a minute... if there is a huge glut on the market, Supply/Demand logic means the oil prices will plummet. Bush and his cronies in the oil world will take a substantial hit.

- “No war, for oil.” I will insure there is no war, you give me the oil. France, et al., have contracts with Iraq: they stand to lose billions if Saddam is removed.

8. The evidence is made up!

- Those who refuse to believe the credibility of the US are immune to logic. If they doubt US credibility, they cannot be reasoned with. However, the US is not the sole source of the evidence: some of it came from Iraq itself. Why not go to the source?

9. We gave them weapons in the 80’s!

- In American criminal law, the seller of the gun is almost always not criminally liable for murder. Remember one of the basic rules of international politics: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Alliances exist until they are no longer politically tenable.

10. This is the first ever preemptive strike!

- This is not a pre emptive strike, but a resumption of hostilities. The first Gulf war 1 ended in a cease fire. Under certain conditions, we stopped bombing Iraq. However, as Iraq has failed its UN obligations, we have intermittently resumed bombing in the last decade or so with impunity. Therefore this would just be picking up where we left off.

11. The Bush Doctrine/War on Terror is only a theory.

- Theories are unproved hypotheses. Gravity started as a theory, but now it is a law because it has been applied and proven. This doctrine/war is not a theory because it is being applied, and it is having results in disrupting terrorist operations. So it is not hypothetical anymore. (Remember, this is still the gulf war, which never stopped. See 10.)

12. But nobody inspects America?

- This is Completely False: See the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, SALT and START, respectively require constant verification of our nuclear/biological stockpile. (note: the most drastic nuclear reduction in America occurred under Bush Sr) (See also Cold Dawn: The Story of Salt by John Newhouse and The nuclear non-proliferation regime : prospects for the 21st century by Thomas, Raju G. C.)

13. Iraq’s weapons are not very effective anyway.

- See Iraq’s statements from early 1990 detailing VX gas, Anthrax. See also images of practice spraying with Mirage Jet from yesterday.
 

Pinhead calls in:

- Jesus was surrounded by evil and never killed anyone: yes. but we’re not the Son of God. Also, God tells us repeatedly in the Bible to fight.

- The only experience George Bush has with kill people is  the Death Penalty: Walk away since it is Bush Bashing here. These people cannot be reasoned with.

- Draft age children: You’re not willing to die for anything, and you want someone else to do it for you. Pure selfishness