"We also know from the reports of the weapons inspectors that Saddam and his scientists were working to develop nuclear weapons, work that certainly would have continued if Saddam had remained in place. Saddam had already demonstrated that he would use chemical weapons, and there is no reason in logic that he wouldn't also restore his chemical weapons stocks once the inspectors had left. He had the largest army in the region, and had shown a determination to use it for expanding his control beyond Iraq. It's not far-fetched, therefore, to consider what economists call a counterfactual--what things would look like today if the U.S. had not invaded Iraq."
"So, while we are justifiably dismayed about what is happening today in Iraq, we should not allow this to obscure the central point--that the world is a better and safer place because Saddam is out of power. Looked at this way, we have already achieved a lot; what remains now--as the president and John McCain have said--is to steady ourselves and see it through."
Man sieht es ja auch am Beispiel von Pakistan: Brutale Militärdikatur, trotzdem brodelt es im Inneren gewaltig. Die einzige Möglichkeit einen Staat nach innen zu stärken, ist einen gemeinsamen Feind finden und den findet man am besten im "bösen" Westen. Saddam hätte, so im Bericht, die ganze islamisch-arabische Welt gegen einen gemeinsamen Feind vereinen können. Mit der Entwicklung einer Atombombe und den Kontakten zu Al-Qaida & Co. auch ganz gewaltig viel Leid verteilen können. Aus der Vergangenheit konnte man lernen, dass Saddam vor nichts zurück schreckte, nicht mal vor einem Krieg mit dem Iran.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen