Boxed-In In Baghdad

[dArKeR]

For much of the Clinton administration's eight years in office the policy mantra on Iraq held that Saddam Hussein was contained and the Iraqi dictator himself was boxed in. The regime was under U.N. sanctions; international weapons inspectors were there, although not at all times, to keep the pressure on; food and medicine went to the Iraqi people through the U.N.-supervised oil-for-food program. In short, Saddam was still in charge but he wasn't an imminent threat to the region.

That policy was dramatically – and forcibly – shifted by the Bush administration, which went to war to oust Saddam. Putting aside for the moment the current debate raging over the evidence the Bush administration used to justify its action, the stated purpose was achieved: Saddam is clearly no longer in power or a threat. However, a number of increasingly messy loose ends are still to be clarified.

As the dust settles from combat operations to postwar reconstruction, the Bush administration is finding it harder and harder to make enough progress to convince the Iraqi people that life is better now without Saddam in power. Basic needs such as electric power and clean water are not something you can count on in Iraq these days, and almost daily guerilla operations continue to be mounted against U.S. and British forces who occupy the country.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/18/opinion/diplomatic/main564024.shtml

Wolfson,
You forgot to mention the 40,000+ men, women and children who were killed in your name.
You forgot to mention Bush has a mind of 10 year old which all honest reporters know.
You forgot to mention Cheney's energy commission was only going after the oil and the dead Americans or Iraqis didn't matter.
[e-mail]

http://darkerxdarker.tripod.com/

[Frances]

1. Wolfson says that Saddam

is not a threat. Then who is responsible for all the dead and wounded and maimed U.S. soldiers?

I can't get the Wash Post story about the men who lost their feet out of my mind.