Posted on 09/27/2002 3:24:18 AM PDT by kattracks
"It's been very lonely," said Dianne Feinstein, Democratic senator from California. She was expressing her relief that Al Gore had joined Democrats who were denouncing President Bush for deciding to stop Iraq's Saddam Hussein, even if it had to lead to war.
"What is happening here is a rush to judgment," she said, "and there are many concerns about the rush to judgment."
Rush to judgment? I felt slightly ill and deeply embarrassed for the Senate that this member, and other senatorial students of foreign affairs, have not grasped that during the decade since the U.S. and its allies called off the Gulf War in triumph (they thought), Saddam has spat on all the conditions that his country promised the United Nations. Conditions such as full disclosure of his chemical, bacteriological and nuclear weapons and his plans for more of them. Quick disclosure - in a couple of weeks, not a decade.
Saddam promised that international inspectors would never be hindered, nay never. When he felt the urge, he just kicked them out.
He promised he would not buy any more parts for nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons. Instead, he became the only living dictator to make and use missiles that spread poisons to strip off the skins of his own people. The poison gases also slaughtered, en masse, children in the wombs of Iraqi, Iranian and Kurdish women. Children and adults vomited their agonized last hours away.
He used money from UN-permitted oil sales to build more weapons instead of giving aid to sick and hungry Iraqi children, as he promised.
For Feinstein, one of the many Washington legislators convinced of their own compassion, and Gore, whom I thought charming when he ran the first time to be vice president, I put one question: Would you turn away from your surviving children if you had seen their brothers, sisters and mothers spend their last moments writhing, and heard their screams? Never?
Then tell, how dare you believe that to move as soon as possible to destroy the Beast of Baghdad is to rush to judgment. How?
I would not bother to write about the senator or Gore now, except that many Americans are against the war. Most often, I find this the weirdest and most frequent question I'm asked: Why should we be starting a war with Iraq at all?
Why we should be starting a war with Iraq? Saddam began one in 1990 - one that dragged in the UN - by invading neighboring Kuwait. When he lost it speedily, he just kept going, agreeing to that long list of peace conditions and then ignoring every one of them. He went further than the coalition had even imagined - increasing terrorism, cleansing Iraq of inspections, increasing the strength of his army after it was left in shreds.
UN delegates still babble about reviving arms inspections, fooling nobody but wistful Americans. It is a nasty joke. The only kind of inspections that would be useful would come after Saddam and his successors are shot and their secret service torturers housed in their own permanent cells in hell.
To believe, as some Americans do, that there is no connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda is naive beyond forgiveness. He gives it arms, money and chemical weapons. Al Qaeda is an organization of people so perverted that they believe, and give thanks, that murdering or torturing women and children will bring them into God's heaven.
Not since the Nazis slaughtered the innocents in ovens have there been people crueler than those of Al Qaeda. I am reading the same books now that I did at the time of the Holocaust, trying futilely to get a hint of why God permits Al Qaeda and its Iraqi partner in satanic perversion to exist. Still no hint.
If you are not afraid to read the truth, look up the March 25 issue of The New Yorker and read "The Great Terror" by Jeffrey Goldberg about the Al Qaeda-Saddam connection. Read it or shut up about a rush to judgment.
Many Americans think that only very naughty monsters with known nuclear bombs are worth taking on. In reply, I offer one of two possibilities: Saddam has some already - which is my belief. Or the Israelis set back his schedule by only about three years when they bombed his key nuclear plant in 1981. Those years will be up soon - there's no time for patience.
Dr. Christine Gidsen, a British geneticist, said it all after she saw the villages of skinned Kurdish corpses created by Iraqi gas: "Please understand, the Kurds were for practice."
Someone who doesn't already know where they stand on this hasn't been paying attention for the last ten years.
If they backed the President 100% and genuinely presented a unified front against Saddam Hussein, the pressure might be sufficient to end his rule in a bloodless exile.
But by opposing Bush, the nation and history on this issue, they have given Saddam hope and aid and comfort.
For that reason, more American soldiers may die.
I hope and pray that enough Americans can send a message to their representatives and or replace them in the Nov. election.
Sept 11 changed history forever.
Don't the Democrats understand?
| Exploring Iraq link to pre-Sept. 11 acts | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Iraq - Scotsman says Saddam has weapons to wipe out world's population, nuclear bomb within 3 years |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| Target: Safe Harbor - Bush's case against Iraq is iron-clad post-9/11. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Is Iraq rearming? (TRANSLATION: IRAQ RE-ARMING) | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| The Iraq Connection - Was Saddam involved in OK City and the 1st WTC bombing? ~ Micah Morrison | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| West Nile Virus Links to Saddam and Castro | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Iraq and Cuba – Fitting Pieces in the West Nile Virus Puzzle? | ||||||
|
Links to information on Iraqi Nuclear Weapons Systems and Design (VERY Scary!) Anyone who is able to type "iraqwatch.org" into a browser will arrive at the Saddam military weapons data base compiled by the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, so often quoted back in the years of U.S.-Soviet nuclear tensions. The Iraq Watch data base has enough history and documentation on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction to occupy a horrified reader for days.
You mention Ramadam in your message regarding his report on Saddam's labs -- here is a link to a story titled "West Nile Mystery" that appeared in New Yorker in 1999 by Robert Preston (remember "The Hot Zone"?). The article relays ramadan's story... worth the read. According to the story, Saddam's remake of the West Nile Virus causes a 97% fatality rate.
|
||||||
Is there a link to this article, I wonder?
Iraq did not bubble up out of no where in the last few months Senator. The gall of these people to pretend that we haven't been dealing with the issue for going on 12 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.