From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Fri Aug 16 2002 - 23:51:22 MDT
With President Bush committed to finishing the job his father
started in Desert Storm, it might do us all good to review what
little Israel was able to do in 1981 to get rid of the nuclear threat
being built by Saddam Hussein twenty years ago. All agreed that
Israel's pre-emptive strike against Iraq's nuclear facility was an act
of great daring, courage, and intelligence. But, of course, Israel
was roundly criticized and condemned for its "aggression."
Yet, that pre-emptive strike eliminated in one fell swoop the
threat of nuclear holocaust in the volatile Middle East, and it gave
the nations in that area a few more years of breathing space in
which to consider alternatives to nuclear war. That there is still no
peace, and knowing that the Iraqi dictator is determined to get his
nuclear bomb, means that Bush must act soon to prevent the worst
from happening. And apparently, Saddam Hussein has skillfully
hidden the facility in which the bomb is being manufactured.
Thus, President Bush's task will be infinitely more difficult than
the pre-emptive strike by Israel.
The Israeli attack was amazingly skillful. "The central building is
entirely collapsed," said one of the French technicians who flew
back to Paris after the attack. "The atomic reactor is unreachable
and the anti-radiation shield has disappeared." The Frenchman
also reported that one of the bombs did not explode, thereby
making it impossible to rebuild the reactor without first destroying
everything that remains. The technician complimented the Israelis
on their skill. "The precision of the attack was stupefying. The
Israelis chose their hour perfectly to avoid the maximum loss of
human life."
Was the pre-emptive strike justified? Was it an act of aggression?
First of all, Iraq took part in the Arab assault on Israel in 1948
shortly after the Jewish state declared its independence. The Iraqi
attack was an act of war, and no peace treaty has been signed
between Israel and Iraq since then. So, technically, they are still at
war. In fact, Iraq felt free to launch missiles against Israel during
the Gulf War, even though Israel took no part in that war and was
restrained by the United States from retaliating.
But if you know that your enemy is preparing to destroy you, must
you wait until he attacks first before fighting back? Large
landmass countries like the U.S. and Russia can afford the luxury
of waiting if they want to. But a tiny country like Israel, with long
vulnerable frontiers and mortal enemies in the region has no
choice but to strike first if it is to survive.
We all know what happened when Israel permitted itself to be
caught by surprise by Syria and Egypt in 1973. That two-week war
cost Israel proportionately more casualties than the entire ten-year
Vietnam War cost Americans. Unlike the United States, Israel
cannot afford long, passive, fruitless military operations that
squander resources, drain the nation's will, cripple the morale of
its soldiers, and end in defeat. So we can understand why Israel
made its move against the Palestinians in the West Bank with
sudden and overwhelming force. Even without Bush's urging them
to get out, they were determined to destroy the terrorist
infrastructure as quickly and effectively as possible.
The international community, instead of condemning Israel,
should have thanked it for taking out that nuclear facility in
Baghdad. The attack had awakened the world to the dangers of
nuclear proliferation, particularly among small countries with
ambitious dictators. When John Phillips, a Princeton student who
had written a paper on how to build an atomic bomb, was
approached by a Pakistani who wanted to buy his plan, he
reported the incident to the FBI. He had no doubt that Iraq was
building an atomic bomb with French technical help. "France is
the whore of nuclear proliferation," he said bluntly.
We know that Osama bin Ladin has been trying to get his hands
on nuclear weapons. Does Saddam Hussein have a secret deal to
supply them to him-at a price? What we do know is that George
Bush wants to get rid of Saddam Hussein and his nuclear
weaponry as soon as he can. How he will do it is no doubt the best
kept secret in Washington. But we hope and pray that it is as
surgical and efficient as the Israeli strike in 1981.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:54 MDT