Kill! Kill! Kill!

My problem is that this "inspection problem" should have been taken care of during Mr. Bill's administration. Instead of going back to the U.N. as inspectors were kicked out of the country, and demanding the right to attack when it made sense, Bill buried the issue.

I think the issue is simple. We do not want Iraq, Iran, N. Korea, Sudan, Pakistan, etc. manufacturing nukes, missiles, or weapons of mass destruction. If we (the U.N. )invade a country like we did in Iraq in 1991, then impose rules on Iraq to cease all programs to build nukes and missiles, and they play games with us, then it's time to punish them. It's really sad that the punishment has to come nearly a decade after the original problem, but sometimes justice isn't swift.

The policy going forward should be simple. IF an inspector annouces an inspection on a particular facility, and our recon photos show trucks backing up to the facility to unload, THEN we should destroy the facility as soon as the photos are (digitally) processed. Hopefully that can occur with 30 minutes to 1 hour of when the photos were taken. No discussion, no BS, no exemptions on ANY building (including Hussien's personal homes). After we blow up two or three buildings, Iraq will get the message that the U.N. means business.

Advocating a regime change is stupid on our part. I know Bush wants Saddam out of power, but I think the Geneva Convention makes it against international law to assasinate a nation's leader (but it's probably vague on removing dictators from power, too). We simply need to enforce the weapons inspection program by backing it up immediate military consequences for non-compliance.

After half of the country is destroyed for weapons inspection non-compliance, then maybe the citizens will decide to vote with their AK-47's.