Chomsky on Iraq [fwd]

[Jim Rovira]

Chomsky sounds about 90% on target this time.  Not bad.  I take issue with
two points:

1. I think he's grossly mistaken in thinking that the lifting of sanctions
would have ensured, or at least helped, the overthrow of Hussein, because it
would have funded increases in his own military and security spending.  He
needs to say this because, of course, he doesn't want to admit the obvious
-- the only way Hussein was ever leaving was via an outside force kicking
him out while he was already down.  I think Bush saw himself as facing two
options -- life sanctions with Hussine in power, or lift sanctions after
removing Hussein from power.  He chose the latter.

2. If Hussein was "authorized" by anyone to suppress rebellions after the
1991 Gulf War, it was by the same international community that opposes the
war now.  It was pretty clear back then that the international community
wanted us to kick Hussien out of Kuwait, but not Iraq.  Back then we didn't
have the sense of threat, the fear factor that Chomsky rightly acknowledged,
motivating us to ignore the international community that we do now.  I
remember the war and remember a large number of Americans saying we should
"finish the job," and I remember arguing with them back then that "everyone
is opposed to that, and that we gained international support only by
promising we wouldn't do that."  Given the aftermath of the war and
Hussein's retaliation against the rebellion, I could almost wish we had
ignored the international community back then.

Hindsight is, of course, 20/20.  And there's no telling what the aftermath
would have been.

Jim