We need a good thread on this.
The time is right to take him out for several reasons.
The time may be right in a sense, but is it worth the cost?
Nobody would like to see him trying to touch the ground with his tip-tip-tippy-toes while dangling from a noose more than I would. I just don't know if the geo-political gains are worth the risk/expenditure. He's 66 years old. He's not going to be there forever. He's not likely to give up WMD's to people who can hurt us -- he knows we can hurt him worse.
I tend to think taking him out is just part of the war on terrorism.
But I think the record amply supports saying that he would have been content to stay at home and torture his own people had we not stoked up his wrath by humilitating him on Desert Storm.
The teetering of the Iranian clerics is a BIG story over there now. That makes it a good time to strike, no doubt about it -- if striking is the right thing to do.
Walt
I guess we'll know for sure after the fact. But it sure would have been nice if someone took Adolph out when he violated the terms of Versailles. We know damn well that would have been worth the cost.
I really see this as a similar test. As to Saddams age, it is again immaterial. At age 66, he could easily have another 20 years in power. The guy is not a sod like so many despots. He takes care of his body. And even if he grabbed his chest today, he has sons on the bench that are even more cruel, cunning and insane than he. It's like the Mafia. Losing a Godfather does not mean the organization goes away.