Questions on Attacking Iraq Loom Large
Scott Ritter raises some interesting questions in his June 19 commentary, “Behind ‘Plot’ on Hussein, a Secret Agenda,” but he doesn’t go far enough. So far, the Bush administration has failed to make a case for why we should attack Iraq. Is it because Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction? There is no solid proof yet presented to the American people. And even if Iraq does possess such weapons, is that reason enough to attack?
Other countries, notably China, Russia, Pakistan and India, also have weapons of mass destruction. Yet we never hear anything from President Bush about attacking them.
And even if Hussein is shown to have such weapons, what proof do we have that he intends to use them against the U.S.?
It seems to me that those questions must be answered long before we even contemplate attacking Iraq and risking American lives.
Jim Calio
Marina del Rey
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
