Defending the virtues of liberty, free markets, and civilization... plus some commentary on the passing scene.

Freedom's Fidelity

Wednesday, June 18, 2003


They say it was an invasion under "false pretenses." "Where are the weapons of mass destruction?" But it is that question itself that is based on false pretenses. Jacque Chirac believed it, Bill Clinton believed it, Tom Daschle believed it, as did all of Bush's political opponents, here's a nice long list of their words. In short, every reasonable person that pondered the more than 10 years of evidence came to the same conclusion. The debate was never about whether or not Saddam Huessein possessed WMD's, the question was how best to deal with him, containment or force.

Saddam had these weapons, and demonstrated a willingness to use them, even on his own people. The international community demanded he disarm and prove it, he never did. Instead he chose to play a 12-year shell game with the world, ignoring countless UN resolutions and forgoing billions of dollars annually because of economic sanctions. Clearly he wanted everyone to believe, indeed fear, that he had them.

But where are the weapons of mass destruction that we heard so much about from the Bush administration? Start with this report from the Chicago Tribune about how the regime withheld medicine from sick children:
"You asked why a government would not give medicine to children," said Dr. Oasem Al Taey, who has run the hospital since U.S. forces entered Baghdad on April 9. "They made this a place of death. They were willing to sacrifice the children for the sake of propaganda."

And this from Kathy Kelly, an aid worker who was in Iraq when the war began:
"All I can tell you is that children were dying horrible and torturous deaths on a daily basis. There was a zero percent cure rate," she said. "They [were] a ruthless government that tried to use propaganda to gain ground."

Now, go read this blog entry logged at the site of one of the many mass graves as it was uncovered. I can't do it justice by excerpting. (Thanks to instapundit for the link.)

Hear the story of some of the thousands of men who are now earless:

After the beating from Saddoun, Anwar was taken to an operating room where he managed to lift his blindfold enough to see and recognize the surgeon. But he won't name him. "He was apologizing and said they forced him to do that," he said. "It wasn't his fault." They were not given painkillers, only tied down to their gurneys. "We were all crying, all of us."

You see, it isn't so much the "weapons" part that should cause the greatest concern, it is the actual real "mass destruction" that has been perpetrated on the people of Iraq and would have continued. Hundreds of thousands dead and tortured yet some continue to call the removal of this monster "immoral". Why? How? Because none of those hundreds of thousands killed were Americans? Because in the two months since the war has ended we haven't found a weapon with an exotic name?

Upon the liberation of a childrens prison, James Lileks astutely described Saddam's (and any) fascist regime as such:
"A daisy chain of snakes biting their tales. Look up at the portrait hanging on the wall. Ask yourself what he wants. Bite harder."

Yes, bite harder! One snake orders the removal of men's ears, another enforces it by killing a surgeon who refuses to do so. Children are buried alive as they clutch their dolls, medicine is withheld from dying children for propaganda purposes, men are thrown feet first into plastic shredders, and the Marsh Arab's wetlands are bled dry as punishment. All of this horror is well documented and has been for years, but it doesn't matter, some are so blinded by ideology that they say, "Yeah, but where are the weapons of mass destruction?" They still don't see it.

It was the regime.


                                                                                                                                                                             Meter Weblog Commenting and Trackback by This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?