Posted on 01/29/2003 1:44:04 PM PST by yonif
Spurred by Monday’s anti-War on Iraq “vigil,” I decided it was necessary that I presented the viewpoint concerning Iraq and what the truthful reasons for military action were. Furthermore, in this three part series, I will put forward what our goals will be in Iraq once Saddam is gone, and finalize my series with a column outlining who exactly these “peace” organizations are.
A REPRESSIVE DICTATORSHIP
The first and foremost attribute of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, that supports why we must go in, is that his rule of Iraq is done in a dictatorial and repressive way. He tortures his people and his opponents. He keeps his people in a prison camp setting. His regime does not allow freedom of any kind, apart from those “freedoms” which bolster his regime and iron fist rule. He has a wide range of secret police institutions who daily kill and imprison those unfortunate souls Saddam feels are hostile to his reign. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq is basically one big concentration camp whose inhabitants are daily propagated with lies and deceit by Hussein while at the same time murdered. Let me quote some of the torture methods from the Foreign Ministry of Britain’s report on Saddam Hussein’s human rights abuses, “eye gouging – eyes are gouged out and the empty eye sockets stuffed with paper, mock executions, suspension from the ceiling, acid baths, and the piercing of hands with electric drills.” The opponents of a war on Iraq know these facts, yet they continue to state they oppose war, operating on a platform which claims to be in protection of Iraq’s citizens. How can they say they care about the citizens, if they don’t mind these citizens living under these conditions?
A HUMANITARIAN DISASTER
Iraq is also in a desperate humanitarian state of things. Its population faces starvation, malnourishment and disease on a daily basis. Food and medicine are not widely available. The sanctions are not, as opponents and Iraq state, the reason this is happening. Before the Gulf War, Saddam used most of his oil revenue to buy weapons and other luxuries for his family, himself and his army. This was BEFORE the sanctions. During this time, his people WERE starving. Now, after the sanctions were put on, he had MORE money to spend as oil revenue was no longer allowed for use to buy weapons (in the legal sense of course). However, even with the increased revenue in his hands, his people continued to starve, and they still do. The sanctions are not the reason for this, HE IS. Removing Saddam’s tyranny will indeed be a victory for Iraq’s suffering men, women and children.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
The next and widely known issue concerning Iraq is Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and he continues to PURSUE them. He has used them in the late 1980’s against his own citizens. He had a period in the years 1998-2002 when no inspectors were allowed into the country, to widely increase their strength. He continues to hide them in various parts of the country and in like-minded countries such as Syria and Libya. He does not intend on disarming and the current inspections show this. The inspectors do not have a chance of finding these weapons due to many reasons such as his transportation of them to countries such as Syria, his scattering of them in various houses and other unnoticeable buildings, the fact he has germ laboratories on wheels who simply move around with each inspection, and his refusal to allow usage of U2 spy planes to search his landscape. Furthermore, the interviewing of Iraqi scientists is unproductive due to the fear the scientists have of being killed if they comply, or because the scientist is nothing more then an undercover Iraqi agent.
Evidence has also been found to support the notion that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction. The finding of 16 empty chemical weapon canisters is just one example. It does not only show he has weapons of mass destruction, but also shows that Iraq has been LYING on the question as it has stated many times to the world that it had none of these weapons which were found. The Iraqi regime has been lying all along. On the one hand Iraq states it has no weapons of mass destruction but on the other hand you have Saddam Hussein’s brother, Uday, saying that, "If they (USA) come, Sept. 11, which they are crying over and see as a big thing, will be a real picnic for them, God willing." Iraq is basically saying “If you attack us we will attack you with weapons of mass destruction we don’t have.” What other evidence do you need?
A LAUNCH PAD FOR TERRORISM
The last and not least reason we must go after Saddam Hussein is terrorism. Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism (not just according to me, ask the State Dept). It harbors terrorist groups who want to destroy America and its allies. It funds and supports terrorist organizations and provides them with access to training camps in the country; groups such as the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Palestine Liberation Front, and the Abu Nidal. Saddam’s regime funds such entities as Palestinian terrorist organizations and their activities. He hands over a check of $25,000 to each Palestinian suicide terrorist bomber’s family, those terrorists responsible for bombing pizzerias, discos, and cinemas. Iraq was the only Arab-Muslim country that did not condemn the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11 2001. Iraq is an infestation of both domestic and international terrorism. It must be cleansed for the sake of our children and Iraq’s children.
As you can see, Saddam Hussein is a ticking time bomb. The threat from Iraq is there and we must go after him before it is too late. The inspectors have failed and they will continue to fail. We must not leave the responsibility of our national security up to a failed organization such as the UN. There may be no imminent threat from Iraq, but as Bush said in his State of the Union Address, since when do terrorists and tyrants tell us when they are going to do us harm?
The time is here, the time is now. The evidence is clear. The reason is apparent. It is time for us to militarily engage and defeat Iraq, overthrow Saddam, dismantle its terrorist plague, destroy its weapons of mass destruction, and LIBERATE the Iraqi people. We will be victorious!
Until next time, YF
Isn't that the decision of those who are actually giving the blood?
What "holy ground" are you referring to here?
Do we or do we not support their enemies (isreal)
Yes, we do support Israel. Do YOU think that this fact justifies what they did to us?
Are we or are we not a threat to their "national security"?
I wasn't aware that al-Qaeda had nation which we could threaten.
What is so different between what they have done and what we are doing?
If you can equate the possibility of removing Saddam Hussein (who you seem to agree is a brutal dictator) to the murder of 3,000 innocent Americans...
Reread post 9.
Please. The situation in the Colonies in the 1770s cannot be compared to present-day Iraq. While ole King George was certainly no friend of the colonists, he certainly was no Saddam Hussein.
We do at the request of the governments where they are located. So what. Are we expected to turn tail and run everytime they announce that land we are on is their Holy land? They have declared E. Timor to be their Holy Land even though it is predominantly Christian. Their goal is to dominate the entire earth and make it all their holy land.
Do we or do we not support their enemies (isreal)?
Yes, we do. Although it seems to me that Israel has been much less an enemy to them than they have to Israel. Israel is just trying to survive. While they seem intent on killing all the Jews. So what if we support Israel? They deserve support. And they are on our Holy Land.
Are we or are we not a threat to their "national security"?
Yes and No. If they support terrorism, we are very much more than a threat. If they don't, then we are not at all a threat. And as demonstrated in Afghanistan, we quickly turned the country back over to the people of that land, once the murderous terrorists were obliterated.
What is so different between what they have done and what we are doing?
Please!!!
Just curious, if you see someone you know is an innocent victem being beat up in an ally as you drive by, would you a) stop and try to help him, or at least call 911 and have help sent, or b) drive off, he wants to be beat up since he does not have the capacity to defend himself?
Sometimes we are called to be good Samaritans, because we can.
Then you are brave to tell the truth to people who don't wish to be confronted by it. I applaud you.
Perhaps later this year you'll use that "Gospel" letter to do a piece on how the conservative viewpoint is squashed on campuses.
http://209.50.252.70/index.shtml?home=home
Introduction of Iraqi National Congress
http://209.50.252.70/p_en/inc/index.shtml?inc=inc
Only fifteen percent of our population fought against England for Independence. The rest sat back and did nothing, like you argue we should do here.
Honor belongs to those who act...
We would have been justified in attacking Germany due to the genocide.
But there are a lot of countries with dictators all of which are repressive to some degree. We can't very well run around and impose our form of democracy on every country.
There are cases where we can and should help. But usually the people have to be ready for it.
When he threatens US with terrorism and his support of terrorism, then YES, it is our job. September 11th should have proven that to us.
As far as humanitarin aid goes, what about the people starving in OUR country?
Ever seen a starving bum? I certainly haven't. They're dirty, filthy, disgusting people, but they usually look like they've had their fare share of meals. Where are these starving people you are speaking of? I haven't seen them.
but I do try to look at it from both sides.
Why would you do that? I'm an American, period. I don't care about the other side, to be frank. If we can live peacefully amongst each other, that's just fine. But, when my life is threatened I really don't care about the "why" and the "what if". All I care about is creating a state of affairs where it won't happen again. And if you understand the religious and idoeological zealousness with which our enemy stands against us, then you know that "peace" talks and delegating is useless. All it does is buy them more time to raise more arms. It's the Soviet Union all over again. The more detente we support, the more we'll have to pay for it later.
and oil isn't a very good one.
What planet are you living on? Oil is the lifeblood of our civilization, wheter it be rich or poor. Oil is most certainly an important equation of this war and the "bounty" of war, including natural resources, has been a prelude to conquest throughout the existence of humanity. Face the facts. This world and mankind is not "ready" for a utopian existence of peace. I know the liberals and peaceniks wish it so, but it just isn't how things are going to be in our lifetime. You better wake up and start living in reality or your enemy is going to make sure YOU go to the GRAVE before they do. The stakes are high my friend and you better figure out which side your on and whether you plan to STAND or LIE down when the lion comes to eat you.
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.