Re: Post-Saddam Iraq?

From: Grant Callaghan (
Date: Sun 10 Nov 2002 - 00:22:17 GMT

  • Next message: "Some interesting academic political essays"

    >But we ARE thinking about a Post-Saddamic Iraq...
    The writer of the article you referred us to seems to take the opposite position:

    There has been much less debate on the second great question: how will Iraq be governed after the American victory? This failure is harder to overlook, as we have reached the same point twice before — in 1919, when Britain became the mandatory power, and in 1991, when the Gulf War had been won. On each occasion there was a lack of preparedness. On each occasion, the failure to answer the question of Iraq’s future government led to great further difficulties.

    Perhaps one can make a checklist of the Iraq policies. Can the United States remove Saddam Hussain? Yes. Will that have UN support? Probably. Will Britain take part? Yes. Will victory remove Iraq’s threat of weapons of mass destruction? Yes. A better Iraq? Very probably. Are the US and UK willing to pay the long-term cost of their global defence commitments? There’s the rub.

    * * *

    My point is that there has been little or no debate of what to do and who will pay for it. What this writer says doesn't do much to assure me that the problem is being addressed and debated by the American and British people or the leaders of the two countries.


    _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun 10 Nov 2002 - 00:25:48 GMT