David Spates "Therefore I Am" Published Oct. 15, 2002

Bush isn't working an angle in Iraq

I'm skeptical of politicians. Anyone who reads my column knows that. I stop short of nihilism, but I do think most politicians' motives are questionable at best.

Whether their goals are driven by satisfying special interests, getting re-elected, toeing the party line or delivering the bacon to the hometown voters, I get the sense that most politicians are working an angle.

I expect very little from politicians as a whole, and they don't disappoint me.

That being said, I am absolutely, positively, 100-percent comfortable in supporting the president's push to get Saddam Hussein's regime out of Iraq. If he says it's worth risking American soldiers' lives to accomplish this, I believe him.

I trust President Bush. He has my confidence. I don't think he's working an angle here. Maybe he is on some other issues, but not this.

As the debate continues as to whether the United States should forcibly remove Saddam, I think back to the president's speech shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks. We Americans still had not fully caught our breath, and his words were those of determination and righteousness.

He said, in essence, that in addition to the terrorists directly responsible for the attacks, the United States also would be coming after anyone who supports or harbors the terrorists' network. We looked at one another and nodded our heads. Let's roll.

A year later, the evidence strongly points toward Saddam as a terrorist supporter, but some of us have gotten a little squeamish at the notion of armed conflict. Our rage has subsided somewhat. Time heals all wounds, it's true, but a few thousand Americans are still dead. All the time in the universe won't change that.

Oh, and by the way, there's the matter of Saddam feverishly working to develop a nuclear bomb. Would Saddam be so bold as to directly use a nuclear bomb against the United States? I doubt it. He doesn't have the guts. Also, he's not that stupid. He knows that if we knew his agents detonated a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city, we would wipe Iraq off the map. The country would simply turn to glass from all the sand being super-heated by a shower of nuclear ballistic missiles.

I think if Saddam did get his grimy mitts on The Bomb, he would give one to bin Laden, followed by a hearty pat on the back and a gleeful wink. "Happy hunting, Osama," he'd say, and just like that a group who did plenty of damage with cheap box cutters would suddenly have humanity's most lethal weapon.

I say we don't let it go that far. If President Bush is confident that forcibly removing Saddam is in our country's best interest, then I believe him. He's privy to a lot of intelligence we don't (and shouldn't) know about. We've been attacked once, and it hurt. It hurt a lot. If we as a nation can take action to stop another attack, possibly a much worse attack, then we'd be foolish not to.

The U.S. intelligence agencies have been under fire all year because they didn't "connect the dots" and figure out Osama's Sept. 11 plan. The FBI, CIA, NSA and other governmental acronyms missed it. It seems like the people who are complaining that the U.S. intelligence community didn't "connect the dots" are many of the same people who today are opposed to a preemptive move against Iraq. Isn't the government trying to "connect the dots" now? Well, maybe these Monday-morning quarterbacks are more interested in naysaying the government than they are in stopping a problem before it starts.

I enjoy taking shots at the government's ineptitude as much (or more!) than anyone, but it seems to me that putting Saddam's keister in our crosshairs is the right thing to do. The president is right on. Hussein is bad news. He's no Hitler, but he's a problem we can remedy before it gets out of control.

· · ·
David Spates is a Knoxville resident and Crossville Chronicle contributor whose column is published each Tuesday. He can be reached at davespates@chartertn.net.