[lit-ideas] Re: Why Gadhafi Disarmed
- From: Scribe1865@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 13:57:14 EDT
In a message dated 4/18/2004 7:25:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ursula@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
Is the point here that the "liberation" of Iraq was a
"good" thing because it scared Gaddafi into abandoning
his weapons program?
No, that was not the point. The point was that Gadhafi said he disarmed
because he was scared of being hit. He also is reported to have said the same
thing
to Bertulosconi, but CNN seemed a more reliable source to site. Also, CIA
assessments stated that Libya's WMD projects were more advanced than predicted,
but who wants to cite CIA assessments of anything these days?
The main point was that the world is more complex than our assumptions about
it, and that good things can come out of a bad move and vice versa.
As for Ursula's and John's point that the increasing number of terrorists
spawned by Iraq obviate Libya's need for WMDs -- I think they are both right
and
wrong here. They are right that the unilateral blunder only creates a more
vicious opposition to the US. But they are probably wrong about the threat of
"autonomous groups." There are no truly autonomous terror groups--for terror
groups to be as effective as al-Qaeda they require some sort of national
support,
national safe haven, or at least complicity.
If autonomy meant effectiveness, Andreas by himself would have ousted Bush
long ago.
Eric
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
