Chemists Have Solutions .
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.
Leading article: Bill Clinton 0, Saddam Hussein 1. So what is the US strategy? - Voices - The Independent
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/...inton-doctrineThe message from Washington is clear. But it has to be spelt out because, earlier this week, the White House strategy of bluffing Iraq into submission by uncompromising talk and a massive show of strength came badly unstuck.
In an error entirely of the Administration's own making, a State Department official disclosed that the US might countenance a more flexible sanctions regime. That told Iraq that it could treat the warmongering pictures being beamed in on CNN (which functions at times like these like a virtual back channel for US diplomacy) as mere sabre-rattling. Like everyone else, the US was prepared to deal. Once that cat was out of the bag, the US had to try doubly hard to look tough.
I think Obama could learn something from the Clinton years......don't get involved unless you plan to take decisive action, action you're willing to back up with muscle. If you don't think you can do that, stay the hell out of it. You're going to lose the confrontation anyway, and look like a fool doing it. I'm thinking Obama should probably stop at condemning the actions of Russia, because anything else like sanctions or saber-rattling toward a country like Russian don't mean much.Not to be deterred by success, the Clinton administration made that demonstration of force in Iraq the exception that proves the rule. Consider its response to the next two bona fide nation security emergencies it faced: the 1994 North Korean nuclear crisis and the current crisis over United Nations inspectors in Iraq. Both cases involved the "major regional contingencies" on which U.S. military planning is based. Yet in each we, Mr. Clinton's top priority was avoiding use of military force and confrontation, even if that meant accepting significant risks to U.S. interests.
Accepting Ambiguity An uncharitable interpretation would be that Mr. Clinton simply declared victory and unleashed spinmeisters to persuade us it was so. In the case of North Korea, after declaring publicly that Pyongyang cannot be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, the president decided to live with the possibility that it has one or two secret atomic bombs, rather than pressing for a more certain resolution that could have risked armed conflict. In the Iraq case, Mr. Clinton so far has accepted the ambiguity of the dangerous status quo ante, while Saddam gained an opportunity to hide the biological weapons that U.N. inspectors had been closing in on.
"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
Chemists Have Solutions .