July 31, 2004
WRONG POLICY:
The Faulty Premise of Pre-emption: Libya's dismantled weapons program is not evidence that a policy of pre-emptive strikes works. (GEOFF D. PORTER, 7/31/04, NY Times)
The Bush administration took a new approach to North Korea this month: it suggested that Kim Jong Il follow the example set by Muammar el-Qaddafi. John R. Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control, urged North Korea to follow Libya's "strategic choice" and voluntarily dismantle its nuclear weapons programs.But if this approach is based on the assumption that Libya acted to avoid a pre-emptive attack, then its premise is flawed. The United States' pre-emptive invasion of Iraq did not play a large role in bringing about Libya's rapprochement. Contrary to the Bush administration's assertions, Libya's dismantled weapons program is not evidence that a policy of pre-emptive strikes works, and it is disingenuous to argue that it will produce the same results in North Korea.
Libya represents not the triumph of pre-emption but of regime change. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 31, 2004 8:20 AM
Man, these guys don't give up easily in the face of overwhelming evidence, do they?
It must be tough being the NY Times: Why was there a famine in the Ukraine during the 1930s? Why, contrary to Times expectations, was Stalin unpopular in Russia? Why did teenage pregnancy rates shoot up in the 60s? Why did communism fall? Why is Bush so popular?
Why do I bother to keep reading this paper?
Posted by: Matt Murphy at July 31, 2004 1:45 PMMatt: You like the comics?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 31, 2004 6:44 PMRobert:
Yes -- the adventures of Enron Paul, Dizzy Dowd, Krazy Kristof, Horrible Herbert, and Hail Ehrenreich enthrall me.
Posted by: Matt Murphy at July 31, 2004 9:38 PMMake that Heil Ehrenreich.
Posted by: Matt at July 31, 2004 9:39 PM