Jewish World Review Dec. 17, 2002 / 12 Teves, 5763
Shouldn't there be a standard for what would trigger a war with Iraq?
http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com | Technically, Saddam is already in material breach of the latest U.N. resolution, but even the administration has said certain technical breaches won't be enough. So what is enough?
In the law, we deal with these questions all the time.
How much, what type of evidence should be sufficient?
I'm going to throw one out to you for discussion: How about something like clear and convincing evidence that Saddam has significant, undisclosed stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons, or any nuclear weapons; or that Saddam's government has sold, distributed, or transferred any of those types of weapons to al Qaeda in the past three years, and the administration should be willing to make its case to the world.
While the U.S. and Britain may eventually serve as judge and jury in words like "significant and stockpiles" and whatever can be lawyered to death, some type of standard or even guideline might be helpful to a currently divided administration and public.
Now, while it's true that the burden is and ought to be on Saddam to come clean, a war can't be waged based on honesty or technical interpretations.
We've long known Saddam's a liar. Look, the administration may already have the goods on Saddam. It does not necessarily have to come from weapons inspectors. And I should say any effort by Saddam to restrict the inspectors' access to sites could also be a legitimate trigger for war.
The U.N. Has recognized that Iraq is different from
other potentially threatening nations, and Saddam may have
already made a war inevitable. But if so, when the time
comes, the administration should silence its critics with
Enjoy this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
12/13/02: Judge Rose by what he did on the field