Christopher Ruddy
Thursday, Feb. 6, 2003

The importance of acting early is underscored by remembering Bill Clinton.

Had Clinton taken steps during the 1990s, even small ones compared to President Bush, we would not be in the crisis with Iraq and North Korea.

We should never forget that in 1998 Bill Clinton promised to stop Saddam’s weapons programs, and even threatened to go to war with Iraq if Saddam did not allow full and unfettered access to the U.N. inspectors.

As it turned out, Clinton acquiesced to Saddam after Saddam failed to abide with U.N. resolutions. Clinton even lifted some of the embargo restraints that had been in place to enforce the U.N. sanctions against Iraq.

Should there be any surprise that Iraq is still playing games and acting defiantly?

President Bush, indeed, faces a serious, serious problem.

With war so imminent, I still ponder to myself if that is the best route for America.

Soon after 9/11, it was clear that Iraq came into the cross hairs of the United States. Even if there was no al-Qaeda connection to 9/11, Iraq does pose a serious danger that cannot be ignored.

Why has it taken so long since 9/11 – almost a year and a half – to go to war against Iraq?

One reason I understand. War is about logistics. At least that’s the American view on war. It takes time to bring men, materiel and armaments to a region far away to wage war.

But even if that were the case, and we still believed that Saddam was capable of mass-destruction attacks, perhaps there were actions we could have done sooner to contain him and limit his ability to retaliate against us once we invaded.

For example, we could have bombed Saddam’s suspected weapons sites, including biological weapons facilities, and other locations we believed were being used for the development of mass-destruction weapons. After all, wasn’t Saddam in violation of several U.N. resolutions and had essentially kicked out the U.N. inspectors several years ago?

Another idea offered by NewsMax pundit Wilson C. Lucom has been that the U.S. offer a reward or bounty for the removal of Saddam Hussein. Wouldn’t a $1 billion reward for the elimination of Saddam be so much more practical and sensible than spending $25 billion to $100 billion on a war?

Also, we’re still not sure why we have not used the CIA more effectively.

Couldn’t covert operations with indigenous forces have led to his ouster? Robert Baer, the highest-ranking CIA office in Iraq during the Clinton years, thinks so and complained that Clinton didn’t do enough to oust Saddam.

Still another thing we could have done was openly offered air and logistical support to indigenous forces and rebel groups within Iraq or even Iraqi military units that sought to depose their leader.

I have no doubt that when the war begins, the U.S. will offer a devastating blow against Iraq.

Still, so much time has elapsed, I wonder if Saddam now has pre-positioned mass-destructive weapons here in the United States or has already given assistance and aid to al-Qaeda to strike us shortly before this war begins, or after.

Oddly, we have allowed Saddam to maneuver during these past 18 months without any real inhibitions.

For instance, Adm. Moorer has argued that one of the first things we should have done was put a strict oil embargo against Iraq. As it turns out, the United States is still buying large amounts of Iraqi oil. According to CBS News we are winking and nodding as illegal Iraqi oil is smuggled through countries such as Syria.

Another concern I have about the war has been the involvement of the United Nations.

Don’t get me wrong; I for one believe world opinion does count and should be courted by the U.S.

America should not act as a superpower, unilaterally and without regard to other people and nations. Still, we are a sovereign nation and ultimately take steps that we believe are in our interests.

By going the U.N. route, however, we have imbued this conclave of dictators with the power to make decisions important to the free world.

Even Bill Clinton, when he declared his “wag the dog” war on Yugoslavia, used the full power of NATO without ever going to the United Nations for support.

By walking down the U.N. path, we may have tied our hands. We certainly have turned world opinion against us.

No doubt, the growing anti-Americanism will only help Saddam, al-Qaeda and other groups when they make reprisals against us. They will claim their acts are justified by world opinion – an opinion America flouted.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Bush Administration
Clinton Scandals
Saddam Hussein/Iraq
United Nations
Editor's note:
"CATASTROPHE" Reveals Bill Clinton’s Role in 9/11 - Click Here to find out more