Quantcast The Triangle
College Media Network

Mulgrew asks Professor Zaller 11 questions on Iraq, throws gauntlet

By: William Mulgrew

Issue date: 5/26/06 Section: Ed-Op
Originally published: 5/26/06 at 10:02 AM EST
Last update: 5/26/06 at 10:01 AM EST
  • Print
  • Email
4. Another goal of insurgents is to cause instability by instigating sectarian outrage, closing down government services and attacking infrastructure. Yet in spite of threats, kidnappings, deaths and sabotage, nearly all of Iraq's schools are now open for the education of 8.5 million children and young people. By January of this year, all of Iraq's 600 state-owned hospitals and clinics remained open. By December of 2006, Iraq will achieve its OPEC quota of 2.8 million barrels of oil a day. The World Bank estimates that as much as 81 percent of Iraqis have access to clean water. Electrical output is 25 percent above pre-war levels. If, as Zaller writes, "the situation in Iraq is deteriorating," why do these developments suggest the opposite?

The Saddam menace

5. Zaller asserts that since no-fly zones frustrated Saddam Hussein's reach, he "was no menace to the United States or any other nation" and that "no military intervention was necessary to contain him." He writes this despite the fact that Saddam's regime made an assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and funded anti-Israeli terrorist groups, ties to al Qaeda notwithstanding. David Kay, former head of the Iraq Survey Group, concludes in a report, "I actually think this may be one of those cases where [Saddam's regime] was even more dangerous than we thought," and, "We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities," which were part of "deliberate concealment efforts." Charles Duelfer, who headed the ISG after David Kay, states in a report, "Virtually no senior Iraqi believed that Saddam had forsaken WMD forever. Evidence suggests that, as resources became available and the constraints of sanctions decayed, there was a direct expansion of activity that would have the effect of supporting future WMD reconstitution." Which is better strategically, removing Saddam and his regime from power before they had WMD capability or waiting until they had such capability?
< prev Page 2 of 4 next >

Article Tools

Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4

Anonymous

posted 5/27/06 @ 4:16 AM EST

Great to read an article from a more positive angle every ones and awile!

Regards,

Marcel Heersema
http://iraqi-dinar.blogspot.com

Anonymous

posted 5/27/06 @ 5:13 PM EST

Eleven thumbs up on this report. Truly Iraq will be a prosperous beacon among Arab nations. All births are kind of Messy.

Anonymous

posted 5/30/06 @ 2:35 PM EST

We lost about 58,000 good men, and women in Veitnam. We would have to be in Iraq for 58 years to match that number. I've worked in Iraq for 2 years, and the people that I have talked to are thankfull that we are there!

Anonymous

posted 6/02/06 @ 7:03 AM EST

I have worked in Iraq for three years and do not need articles to tell me its better. I can tell by the fact that I have not been shot at for a long time. (Continued…)

Post a Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.



Triangle Video Section: Use the arrows to select different videos.

Advertisement

Poll

Is the death penalty ever a justifiable punishment?

Submit Vote

View Results

Advertisement