Mistakes paved way to this day

New York Daily News ^ | March 20, 2003 | Ann Coulter

[Gamecock]

Now that the shooting has started in Iraq, it is only a matter of time - not much time - before Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is out. But the question of how this man stayed in power for so long will continue to perplex historians for a long time to come. The answer is, he had a lot of help. We might be in a very different situation had not the first President George Bush and his team not won a war and then fumbled the peace with such buttery fingers that they missed how shrewdly they were being manipulated by Saddam's loyal generals, who came to them with surrender in their mouths and blood on their minds.

Fundamentally, after winning the Gulf War, the first Bush administration sold out the Shiite rebels who rose against Saddam in the south because Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf gave the butcher's boys permission to use armed helicopters when they entered southern Iraq. The rebels were given no assistance by the Americans. The same was true of the Kurds when they rebelled in the north. No support came from America.

What fools, those Americans, Saddam and his crew must have laughed: They did not know how to finish a job and were not willing to help those who would have died trying to finish it for them.

Then there is the vaunted UN Security Council, which did not put enough muscle behind its weapons inspectors in the late '90s. In the PBS program "The Long Road to War," one inspector pointed out that France, Russia and China were opposed to using muscle because of business dealings with Saddam or the billions he owed them.

In 1998, Saddam threw out the inspectors, accusing them of being spies. Bill Clinton - hardly a war President - had had enough and ordered the four-day bombings known as Desert Fox. By that point, the people of Iraq were suffering greatly because, like most dictators, Saddam had chosen to ignore their troubles while building new palaces.

Yet Saddam's luck ran hot again. Mr. Bill was so tarred by the Monica Lewinsky mess that a term entered the language from the title of a movie: "Wag the Dog." The idea being that any Clinton offensive against Iraq would be interpreted as a ploy to take the heat off his hindquarters. Saddam took the day again.

At that point, Saddam must have felt preordained to remain in power.

So it seems everybody has a piece of this history we are now living. Bush I failed to follow through. Schwarzkopf was finessed by crafty Iraqi generals. The UN refused to strongly back the inspectors, even after a defecting general told them of the hiding place for 17 tons of chemical weapons! Clinton couldn't cope because he was literally caught with his pants down.

Saddam is surely a goner now. But it will take much suffering to oust him - not only because of his luck, but because of international cooperation that probably surprised even him.

[Gamecock]

Per convention:

[Mark17]

But the question of how this man stayed in power for so long will continue to perplex historians for a long time to come. The answer is, he had a lot of help.

Yes he did. Another factor, if I am not mistaken, and I could be, but I think Saddam believed in severe amounts of gun control.

[Ronin]

It's good that Ann has the fortitude to point out Republican mistakes -- and Lord knows we made them.

This whole mess could have been avoided if people in Washington had turned off CNN and the "highway of death" and let the Generals on the ground finish the job.

Ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away as anyone older than five has learned. Eventually you have to face it. Now we are and the result is going to be the same as it could have been over a decade ago.

The only difference is the thousands of dead Iraqis killed by Saddam that could/would still be alive if we had continued on to Baghdad then.

[gcruse]

It feels like Ann's, but is pretty flat.

[bucephalus]

(I'm probably going to wish I were in Baghdad after I post this, but. . .) I really don't like Ann Coulter. I mean, sure, I look at her and it's instant wood, but it's not enough. (Brief digression: I haven't lived in the US for 7 years and don't get her on my TV package here.) I saw her on TV back home a couple of years ago and really thought she fit all of the usually vapid liberal stereotypes. Conservatives are mean, coldhearted, reductionistic. When they trot out all this garbage about Rush and many others I find it absurd. Her book SLANDER sucks, too. Sure I know most of it is true and all, but it's crybabyish. Many have done it much better. (and now I repair to my bomb shelter)

[driftless]

You're wrong in your overall assessment of Coulter, but she can overstep the bounds of propriety at times. However she is a political warrior and not afraid to ruffle feathers. Slam conservatives all you want, but try to enunciate a few talking points. What do you actually believe in?

[Dahoser]

The reason this does not read like an Ann Coulter piece is because it's a Stanley Crouch piece! I realize it's easy to mix them up, so I'm posting a picture of Stanley to avoid future snafus.

[Caesar Soze]

The New York Daily News is under the impression that Stanley Crouch wrote this. So, per revised convention:

[mylife]

gentle slap....All Ann has tried to do is point out hypocrisy, ocassionally she whines....saying if it is good for you it must be ok for me....it is tounge in cheek

[BrooklynGOP]

Uh. This is an article by Stanley Crouch, not Ann Coulter.

[WOSG]

LOL ... yeah, I always confuse the two! :-)

[halfdome]

I have always heard that most homes in Iraq have firearms.

[Monitor]

But the question of how this man stayed in power for so long will continue to perplex historians for a long time to come.

I think the 'history' regarding Iraq needs a lens that goes back a little further in time than Bush Sr. Like perhaps back to a time marked by the names Jimmy Carter, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlevi, and Ayatollah Khomeini.

[Spruce]

France

[Chummy]

Her book SLANDER sucks, too. Sure I know most of it is true and all, but it's crybabyish.

I agree. Facts is facts, but it comes across an agonizing read¹ and its shrill tone is more fitting a Lib than of what Ms. Coulter is capable.


¹ with all the footnotes<sup>2

2</sup> see Slander by Ann Coulter<sup>3

3</sup> an otherwise terrific conservative voice<sup>4

4</sup> see ¹

[MHGinTN]

Watch your language, there are Ladies present!... Call them frogs.

[laz17]

How did this man stay in power for so long? Because the French, the Germans, the Russians, the Chinese, and the UN enabled him and circled the wagons around him.

[Spruce]

Beg pardon.

[Jimmy Valentine]

Becephalus [Oxhead]

You need a little more experience of her. She is very impressive in person; refreshingly blunt. She can come off as harsh when paired with a weasely worded opponent from the liberal side, which is why many do not like her.

She also has green eyes like ray guns; very high energy level.

Regards,