Bombs may not be optimum solution - By Thomas Sowell
     Nothing is easier than getting into a war. Getting out can be a
 lot harder. Vietnam should have taught us that --- and the lesson
 should not need repeating.
     President Clinton's speech in the Pentagon, attempting to ex-
 plain what our purpose is in attacking Iraq, was long on platitudes
 and elaborations of the obvious but very short on the real question
 - just what result will cause us to stop the war and go home?  He
 totally ignored the most ominous question of all:  What if this
 widens into a bigger war involving more countries?
     Iraq tried to widen the Gulf War of 199l by firing missiles into
 Israel, which had nothing to do with that war but whose retaliation
 might have brought in other Arab nations or even the Russians.
 Israel held off retaliating, but we cannot count on such restraint
 again, especially if Iraqi missiles with chemical or biological war-
 heads start landing on Jerusalem or Tel Aviv.
     If Israel retaliation brings in Arab nations, Russians may not
 be far behind. Russian leaders have already warned us that a Middle
 East war could escalate into World War III. Maybe they are just
 bluffing. But maybe they are not
     The Russians need not declare war. They can always send in "vol-
 unteers" with equipment to counter American high-tech military power,
 and we would be faced with a wholly different situation from a
 replay of the 1991 Gulf War.
     We have been kidding ourselves for too long that Russia is no
 longer a superpower. Any nation with enough nuclear missiles to wipe
 American cities off the map is not chopped liver.
     If nothing else, the openly expressed belligerence of Russian
 leaders shows that there are political brownie points to be won in
 Russia by taking a stand against the United States. If Boris Yeltsin,
 whom we have helped, is willing to inject himself into a Middle East
 issue like this, what about more strident Russian nationalists who
 are waiting in the wings for Yeltsin's political or personal demise?
     It might well be foolish for the Russians to follow up their
 threats with military action in the Middle East or elsewhere. But
 many wars have been ignited or escalated by foolish actions.
     Incidentally how wise are we to extend NATO into Russia's back-
 yard in Eastern Europe, when they are already talking tough about
 something happening farther away and and among people with whom they
 have had no historic ties? Eastern Europe and the Balkans have some
 of the most turbulent histories of any regions in the world -- and
 Russians have intervened militarily there under both the czars and
 the Communists.
     Extending NATO into Russia's backyard is a high-risk and low-
 yield policy which may have something to do with Russia's belligerent
 response toward American military action in Iraq.
     Wars should never be begun with the rosy assumption that every-
 thing will go according to plan. Nor should we start a war because
 we just have to do something about somebody we detest. Saddam Hussein
 is certainly rotten, but are we prepared to start bombing every rotten
 despot? Are we even prepared to start bombing every country with wea-
 pons of mass destruction?
     Bill Clinton has failed to tell us what his exit strategy is.
 When will we stop the war and go home? When Saddam Hussein agrees to
 unlimited U.N. inspection?  What if he never agrees?  Will we keep
 bombing the Iraqis forever?
     Saddam Hussein doesn't care how many Iraqis we kill.  But the
 American public will, and especially when the dead Iraqi women and
 children are televised in Baghdad and brought into every American
 home at dinner time. Add to that the dead Americans coming home in
 body bags, and you do not have the conditions needed for lasting
 public support for extended military action.
     In the 1991 Gulf War, we had clear objectives and the ability to
 win those objectives in short order. The objective was to drive the
 Iraqi army out of Kuwait and destroy its equipment.  When that was
 done, we could declare victory and go home.
     The Clinton administration shows its usual pattern of playing
 everything politically by ear on a day-to-day basis. But, in war
 such shortsightedness has often been the road to long-run tragedy.
     If nothing else, the current Middle East crisis has shown how
 little we can count on most of our allies when the chips are down.
 Why are we acquiring more such allies on the Russian borders, where
 they may be more dangerous to us than to the Russians if we allow
 ourselves to get dragged into their century old hostilities?
 Economist Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution,
 Stanford, Calif. He writes this column for Creator's Syndicate.
 Knoxville News Sentinel 21 Feb 98
--- DB 1.39/004487
---------------