Graffiti on the Walls of Valhalla

Let Us Be Clear

I do not think we should go to war with Iraq at this time.

The jury's still out in my mind whether we ever need to go to war with Iraq, but I am most decidedly against military action now. Why?

Because:

--the inspections seem to be working,

--we do not have the support of the international community,

--there are more important foes that we should be looking at, and

--we still haven't won the "War on Terrorism," and this is just not contributing to that.

North Korea has nuclear weapons (not nookyoolar weapons, as the ignorant would say), but honest-to-god NUCLEAR weapons, and missiles capable of depositing them on our shores. We cannot continue to ignore this threat or pretend that it is only a regional dispute. To do so in this case and yet still go ahead with an invasion of a less-capable foe is not only gutless and honorless, but lacks logic and reason.

There is one possible scenario where the current administration's bravado makes sense: bluff. In The Arab Mind, essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the current regimes in the Middle East, Raphael Patai stresses the verbal nature of modern Arabs; the word, as spoken, as declared, becomes more important than the enactment of the deed. The very threat itself (when Bush says, "We will topple Saddam Hussein's regime"), becomes more important than the deed itself-- to the Iraqis, Bush is not only threatening, he is making it a reality (regardless of the fact that the invasion has not yet begun). In this context, the build-up of forces, the belligerent words, and the absolute refusal to compromise put much more pressure on the Iraqis than we here in the West truly understand. Whereas we hear a threat, the Iraqis hear inevitability. Their only recourse would be to fully cooperate.

If this is actually what Bush is doing, then I will be absolutely stunned-- and grudgingly pleased.

As others have pointed out, however, there is a much more likely meaning for what Bush is saying: he really does mean it.

Bush's sabre-rattling linked to self-interest

This is my nightmare scenario, because, as a pragmatist, it is also the only scenario that I think will actually bring about real reform in the Middle East. It captures the best aspects of the use of power: reshape the world and make it an arguably better place without letting other people's special interests get in your way. And it galls me because I cannot stand this man being responsible for bringing about some of the changes I want in this world.

And now, I'm speechless.