GETTING SADDAM HUSSEIN; CAREFULLY WEIGH POTENTIAL BENEFITS AND CONSEQUENCES BEFORE ACTING.(Editorial)(Editorial)

From: The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY) | Date: January 7, 2002 | Copyright information

The time may be ripe for the United States to "get" Saddam Hussein, advisers reportedly are telling President Bush. To be sure, the prospect of taking out the Iraqi dictator, who has been a raspberry seed stuck between Western molars for more than a decade, carries visceral satisfaction.

But then what? What would be the real foreign-policy and national-security advantages of such a move? More importantly, what would be the consequences on stability in the politically vol...

Read all of this article with a FREE trial to HighBeam Research

Related newspaper, magazine, and journal articles from HighBeam Research

Missteps have cost America dearly in Iraq ; Removing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein by force made sense, but the way the United States and its partners have gone about it is questionable.
Portland Press Herald (Maine) ; Portland Press Herald (Maine) 05-29-2004 Missteps have cost America dearly in Iraq ; Removing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein by force made sense, but the way the United States and its partners have gone about it is questionable. Edition: FINAL Section: Editorial With the president's self-imposed
Gulf War syndrome.(the latest confrontation with Saddam Hussein in Iraq serves as a reminder that the United States should change its policy and support the lifting of sanctions in that country, provided the specified conditions are met)(Brief Article)
The Nation ; Saddam Hussein is a bloodthirsty dictator who has used poison gas against civilians, and even now is likely cooking up botulin, anthrax and nerve gas in basements around Baghdad. And he tells lies: to the U.N. Special Commission investigating weapons of mass destruction, to the Iraqi people, to his
No More Halfway Measures; Calls have grown louder for the United States to take action against Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Outlook asked a proponent of the "oust Saddam" movement to explain how such a campaign would work.
The Washington Post ; In what may be the best advertised war in modern times, the United States is marching again toward the use of force against Iraq. The immediate provocation is Saddam Hussein's defiant, unrelenting attachment to weapons of mass destruction and his interference with U.N. inspectors charged with
Strike Hard; "This time the United States had better respond seriously."
The Washington Post ; President Clinton is on the verge of making a huge mistake. He maintains that the United States should not view Saddam Hussein's latest moves "through the prism of the Gulf War." Instead, Clinton contends that the appropriate reference is to the release of sarin gas in a Japanese subway, and that
SHOULD THE UNITED STATES LAUNCH AN ATTACK ON IRAQ?(EDITORIAL)
The Kentucky Post (Covington, KY) ; Should the United States attack Iraq? For weeks debate has risen over whether the United States should launch a preemptive strike against Iraq where the Bush administration says Saddam Hussein is amassing weapons of mass destruction. President Bush most recently asked Congress to grant him the