Una para la araña
Me encontré esto en Die Puny Humans: es un fragmento de un artículo de Time titulado "Por que no retiramos a Saddam", publicado el 2 de Marzo de 1998.We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.
Pueden leer el artículo completo aquí o ver un scan en PDF aquí. Lo curioso del asunto es que el artículo "desapareció" de los archivos en línea de Time sin explicación. Curioso, ¿no?
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario