The Washington Post talks about two potential outcomes of a non-Security Council approved war:
Will the administration pay a price for bulldozing ahead — assuming that’s what it does — without responding substantively to critics at home and abroad who are urging a slower, more deliberate squeeze on Saddam Hussein? Or will it be the critics who are embarrassed by a brief, successful war that unmasks Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction with few losses and few long-term negative repercussions?
I’m still expecting Saddam to overreach in the next month by not sufficiently cooperating, and for the French to support us when we attack. We’ll know a lot more this week, when we can see whether the Security Council approves a new resolution with specific, objective milestones and deliverables, such as the destruction of all of Saddam’s illegal missiles.
Of course, I think the second scenario from the quote is the one to count on.
Post a Comment