My buddy Saddam and me near the "Green Zone", Baghdad.
Saddam loved Saddam. He had statues and pictures of himself everywhere. No one could say Saddam was a bad man without facing extreme punishment, torture, or death. I met a man who casually suggested that "Saddam's chair has wobbly legs" when a friend asked him what he thought Iraq's future would be like. That man was sent to prison for two years for his comment.
Families were afraid to talk about Saddam in their own homes for fear that other family members would inform to the Mukhabbarat (intelligence service) about their comments and have them thrown in jail, or worse. If the Mukhabbarat caught wind of any dissent, they would torture, rape, and kill whole neighborhoods until someone confessed.
I am amazed when people call this an "illegal war". Who defines "illegal"? The United Nations? That body is so filled with corruption and dubious behavior that it would be hypocritical for them to dictate the definition of "illegal" to anyone.
The war is certainly not illegal and I think the many tens of thousands of people who were imprisoned, tortured, raped, or killed by Saddam would not couch the war in those terms. Saddam broke UN resolution after UN resolution. He treated his people like dogs while he and his sons lived like kings. His sons would party, use drugs and alcohol, and then go out at night to kidnap women for their sexual pleasure. No one could resist or object. Even Saddam's half-brother, Watban, was shot by Uday in 1995 over a popularity dispute.
No one was safe from Hussein's madness, including the United States. Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) even attempted to assasinate George H. W. Bush at one point. Saddam gave millions of dollars to terrorism and supported families of those "martyrs" (read: suicide bomber terrorists) who blew up Jews and Americans. Face it: Saddam WAS A REAL THREAT to American and western security.
Shouts of "illegal war" and "lies" are just as misguided and naive as the proclaimation of "peace in our time" by British Prime Minister Chamberlain about Hitler. We will wait and watch at our own peril. There were no "lies" about WMD bringing us into this war either. WMD was a real threat in Iraq. Just ask the Kurds in Jalabja about Sarin and Mustard gas. In Jalabja, there is a statue of an Iraqi Kurd holding her baby tightly in her arms while laying on the ground - she is dead - her baby is dead. She was running away from the gas before she fell - an "innocent" woman killed for political purposes. WMD killed her.
Saddam also used it against the Iranians. Saddam knew chemical weapons meant power. Saddam was addicted to power and would not have given up that power willingly. Saddam remained a liar and charlatan until he was captured in his "spider hole" and remains deceptive to this day - he was never truthful to the outside world, so why would any rational man believe he really dismantled his WMD program and gave up a tool of power?
Saddam was very smart about compartmentalizing knowledge of his WMD program. He stored his chemical weapons away from his artillery men until it was time to use them. His Republican Guards (RG) were the only ones allowed to know where they were stored, and only a select few really had the plan. He didn't trust his own Army. Elements of the RG were stationed behind conventional units to catch and kill deserters. If he didn't trust his own people, then you must assume that people with direct knowledge of the whereabouts of WMD are few and far between, and those who possess the knowledge will not willingly admit it or face prosecution for their part in atrocities.
I talked to a former Iraqi official who told me that after barrels of an "unknown" substance were delivered and buried at a site in Northern Iraq, all the laborers who buried the barrels were shot to eliminate witnesses. That sure does stop people from telling us where the WMD is, doesn't it? And to suggest that we could readily find a few barrels of something hidden in a place the size of Texas is ludicrous. Iraq has miles and miles of desolate desert to hide things in. "Rumors" of people pulling up to the river and dumping barrels in the middle of the night are prolific. So to all you people who truly believe Iraq had no WMD, I say I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. No one can say with certainty that Saddam did not have WMD in 2003.
I don't have a perfect solution to end the insurgency in Iraq. I know personally that it is fueled by "foreigners" (read: non-Iraqi terrorists), former regime loyalists, and criminals. Saddam had his version of the Mariel Boat Lift in Iraq prior to the war in 2003. He released thousands and thousands of prisoners from jail. Not just guys who didn't talk nice about Saddam either. I am talking about murderers, thugs, and rapists. They were allowed to be released if they agreed to fight with the Fedayeen Saddam - Saddam's ski mask wearing, paramilitary organization. And fight they did for a little while, but as soon as they had the chance they cut and ran. Now, remnants of the Fedayeen Saddam (who are not welcome back in their former homes because of their crimes) have found the only home they can find with the insurgency. What alternative do they have? They are criminals who cannot or will not ever integrate into a free Iraqi society. The insurgency is the perfect place for them to be, and they are the perfect candidates for terrorist recruitment - nothing left to lose.
The foreign Jihadists are also coming to Iraq like moths to the flame. Somewhere in a mosque in Sudan or Syria, a dedicated muslim is hearing the mosque sheik preach a sermon of hate. The mosque sheik (Imam or mullah, take your pick) is telling the congregation that the great Satan is subjugating "poor, innocent muslims" and is raping little muslim girls while blood is running down his long fangs. So Mr. Syrian muslim gets rightfully outraged at this kind of behavior. Then the mosque sheik shames him by telling him he should not sit in the quiet of his home while his fellow muslims are suffering. The mosque also produces a slick DVD of all the "atrocities" committed by the great Satan, and also shows the brave mujaheddin blowing up IEDs on their road to victory in the name of Allah.
The sheik sets the conditions for his terrorist comrades to recruit this upstanding servant of Allah into the ranks of future terrorists and martyrs. Mr. Syrian muslim agrees to go which lessens his shame, gets on the bus in Damascus, and then drives to the border of Iraq where he is met by smugglers - Iraqis and Syrians have become proficient at smuggling over hundreds of years - who take him to places like Al Qaim, Ramahdi, or Fallujah. His terrorist leader puts him in a car packed with explosives and tells him to drive to his death and entrance into "paradise", of course assuring him that his family will be compensated and taken care of after his death. The terrorist leader doesn't drive the car though because he realizes that he is much more important to Allah alive.
The terrorist leader doesn't care about Iraq, Iraqis, or his jihadist followers except for the fact that they further his agenda of Holy Jihad against the Great Satan and his own rise to glory and power. They say they are trying to expel the "occupier" because that is what we are called in the Koran. Wherever muslims are is called the "house of Islam" and wherever muslims aren't is called the "house of war". This is the word of Allah through Mohammed - if you don't believe me, read it for yourself. So therefore they believe it is right to expel the "occupier".
The term "occupier" was an unfortunate result of language from the Geneva Conventions - a better term should have been used from the beginning. One Iraqi man told me that if we would have called ourselves "liberation forces" exclusively, the Iraqi people would have followed suit. But instead, our own term has suited the terrorist's agenda perfectly. The spoken word is extremely important in Arab society.
Our western mindset prevents us from fully coming to grips with the complexities of Arab society and Islam. Only when we stop defining our actions in western terms will we be able to start bringing closure to this situation. American politicians pretend to be better judges of what Islam is about than the Islamic scholars who preach in the mosque, but the problem is American politicians don't speak Arabic and have never read the Koran. The "house of Allah" and the "house of war" are the only two alternatives for the muslim, so when President Bush says we are at war with the Islamic terrorists he is absolutely correct, and that is exactly the way the terrorists perceive it. We are at war, full stop.
One thing Iraqis and all muslims should understand is that I do not want to live in their country or to subjugate them. I will be happy to drink tea and smoke cigarettes with them. I will be happy to help them dig a well, or fix their car. I will eat dinner with them and not use my left hand doing it. But the bottom line is: I have my own country, and home, and family to go home to.
I mean them no harm or disrespect when I follow orders and expel a vicious, evil regime from their country. My only wish is to have the honest, freedom-loving people of Iraq stand up and fight oppression. The foreigner terrorists are not there for the benefit of Iraq, and only wish to subjugate them under their rule like the Taliban did in Afghanistan. I know this because terrorists told me so.
In America we believe that it is your right to worship God in the way you choose. We want you to worship, but don't allow the terrorists to dictate how you worship. "Allahu Akbar" is correct - "God is great" in both Arabic and English, and be assured he understands both languages fluently!! But when we hear that phrase being chanted by a foreign Islamic butcher who hacks the heads off of prisoners, it tends to sour us on Iraq and really piss us off. Please stand up for Iraq and stop this madness...we would all rather go home.
(Note: I published this post earlier this year, but thought its message was just as valid today...apparently some people still don't get it.)
0 comments:
Post a Comment