Less of a religious piece, more political – but humour me… In the last 100 years there have been many atrocities, many genocides. I would like to place the magnifying glass over one single event just to explain a point – which will be evident at the end. It’s not as if I have to hint or even play a word game – I will be discussing a leader who committed genocide and eventually was beaten by European and U.S. forces, do you know who I am talking about? Of course you do. We all know him and his famous moustache. So what do we know about him? I will now go over some details just to clarify. Well, as stated earlier:
- He was known for his facial hair – a moustache that will go down in history.
- As a youth he enjoyed the arts (writing, painting – architecture).
- He later become a prominent politician.
- A fierce dictator.
- A totalitarian.
- Became the leader of a country and ruled with an iron fist.
- Invaded a sovereign nation.
- Committed genocide, ordering the slaughter or men women & children.
- Bought & built his own stock pile of Chemical weapons.
- Used chemicals as weapons against his enemies.
- Divided peoples due to ethnicity and race.
- Broke international law/Treaties by building his armed forces and creating harmful weapons against world sanctions.
- His family enjoyed riches, whilst mass graves were dug for the dead.
- Used aggression against his neighbour states, and murder against inhabitants of his own.
- Used torture.
- Was eventually opposed by European and U.S. forces.
- After his death, the country was left with a democratic government – for better or worse.
So who am I speaking about? Do you know his name? Of course we do – Saddam Hussein. If you thought Adolf Hitler, I’m sorry, but that was the point. I am a leftist and I supported the outing of Saddam Hussein from 2003 onwards, which for some reason now has been hijacked as a right-wing issue. Do not fall for this stupidity or lapse in judgement, ask yourself, how many people would think Winston Churchill right wing for fighting Hitler? Yet how many find Tony Blair or George Bush right wing for fighting Saddam? Many may try and find a logical fallacy hidden within the comparison, but take it on face value. Don’t get me wrong, I have seen children’s birthday parties conducted with more professionalism, but does this diminish the sentiment? If you do a good thing, for a bad reason, is it still a good thing? In my opinion, it is. The U.S. sadly, are saddled with more corruption and lies regarding this conflict – yet regardless of the bad timing (after 9/11); regardless of the supposed lies in congress – or the unsuccessful search for WMD’s, the war was still as just as any before it. A dictator who commits genocide should be stopped, never mind hating Hitler but sympathising with the Hussein crime family, they both needed to be held to account for their war crimes. I had to be unspecific about invading nations, as Saddam did this twice (Kuwait & Saudi Arabia), although he attacked three neighbouring states (Iran, Kuwait & Saudi Arabia) – whereas Hitler invaded nations like you read about (Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Yugoslavia, France, Denmark, Norway, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the Soviet Union) and some more though I cannot recite the lot off the top of my head. Regarding Chemical Weapons (WMD’s) this seems to be one of the few times Saddam trumped Adolf; Although Hitler spent lots of money creating harmful chemical weapons, he never used them in battle. Many feel this was due to being gassed himself by the British in WWI, the agony, I am led to believe, had made him uneasy about using such weapons on the battle field; only in concentration camps to gas Jews did he see a fit purpose for this technology; see! Even Hitler had a moral compass (of sorts). Whereas Saddam had a fetish it seemed to use chemical weapons in warfare. The images of children killed by chemical weapons by Saddam can be found on google – they have a haunting similarity to 1940’s holocaust pictures. For those who don’t know, which is the majority nowadays, the outing of Saddam was not some made up plan by George Bush in 2003 due to oil, which split his own party down the middle; for those who know what they are talking about, they are aware the vote to oust Saddam was in 1998 by Clinton, and voted for unanimously. (The Iraq Liberation act of 1998) This was done at the same time the U.S. had not only a stable but a surplus treasury, and couldn’t care less about the price of oil – it was the democratic thing to do, not just a financial interest. The search for WMD’s is a foul example of the useless modern-day anti-everything populous; we know for a fact Saddam used WMD’s against his own people, remember the lesser known gulf wars? Remember the genocide? Have you not googled the images of thousands of dead from WMD’s at the hands of Saddam? Please do so to remind yourself as to why the conflict had been on the table since the mid to late 90’s. In our ever recycling and forward thinking green world (I wish) how can one forget Saddam ordering his troops to empty millions of gallons of crude oil into the Persian Gulf? Or blowing up oil wells and lighting oil fields in what was known as the biggest and worst man-made ecological disaster in history? Suddenly these facts have disappeared, and all we can remember is how Saddam wasn’t that bad of a guy, and George Bush is evil. Don’t get me wrong, idiotic and almost childlike in intellect – but evil? No. President Clinton stated in Feb 1998: “Iraq admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability, notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 boilogical-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.” He also stockpiled sarin gas in the 1,000 ton volume. But I guess we are now led to believe that between 1998 and 2003 all of these weapons simply disappeared into thin air? Sure he destroyed some, and so did the US, but all of it! I think not. Regarding WMD’s, does anyone wonder why UN weapons inspectors were denied access to the country initially, and then after quite sometime had passed they were finally invited in – with the condition that they only view sites chosen by Saddam? Does that not sound fishy to you? How about the fact that the UN weapons inspectors were eventually allowed to see all weapons sites but only at certain times, having to wait weeks sometimes longer to visit probable sites – why would Saddam hold an inspector back for a few weeks? It’s as if he had WMD’s (which we know he used a decade earlier) and needed a month to get rid of them. This is crazy talk right? Not according to the many books and articles released since the invasion that clearly state the movement of weapons between the borders of Syria and Iraq. Both countries were linked by the rule of the Baathist parties, they were neighbouring countries, they engaged in trade (legal and illegal) before and after the war. According to the US government the illegal trade between Syria and Iraq generated $3.4 billion before 2005. In 2006’s “Saddam’s Secrets”, Georges Sada, a former General if Saddam’s air force wrote in his book, that Saddam had secretly moved much of his WMD arsenal to Syria before the US led invasion under the cover of providing relief to Syrian earthquake victims. And it is not as if using a nice sheer for terrorism is above Saddam, remember the food for oil programme? So in closing, I would like us to again examine the historicity of US/UK intervention in both WW2 & The 2003 invasion of Iraq without the bias and bigotry of modern day ideology, that seems to distinguish a large difference between the two conflicts that honestly isn’t really present. Although I accept cheap oil prices would have been icing on the cake (if we actually got it – we never) but based on this new wave intelligentsia that claims no WMD’s found = No WMD’s, really? Can a human with full mental capacity use this as an argument and keep a straight face? That’s like saying if I murder a family, and the police never find their bodies, I never committed the murder – it is, to put it mildly, ludicrous and infantile in its stupidity. Sadly at age 13 I was not writing pieces on such subjects, but I distinctly remember posing the same questions back then – only for many years to be invalidated by any credible evidence other than hearsay and anecdotes. Until it finally happened. In August 2013 Syria used Chemical weapons against its own people, supposedly the ownership of such WMD’s had been unknown to the UN, the volume of WMD’s used had been more than any could have expected and most definitely unattainable by their own means. Since the late 80’s their stock pile and creation has been monitored closely; until the attack none in the international community even knew Syria had these weapons – so what did they use? Some new chemical agent only they could create? Something they have have bought from North Korea of another of their allies that the UN would know of? Or was it the same weapon only used by one other country and one other dictator in the history of chemical warfare? Sarin Gas (WMD of choice by Saddam Hussein) I wonder where Syria found such a stock pile of WMD’s? Why are they so tight-lipped about where they came from? And why was it among others the weapon that Saddam had 1,000 of tons of before the inspectors were allowed access to his empty weapon’s sites? Anyone who thinks they have debunked the transport of weapons because Saddam said on TV he was “bluffing” need to remember what he would gain from saying he bluffed (lesser sentence if tried at the Hague) and if he told the truth (harsher sentence), and also remember you are now saying you believe something that has left of the mouth of Saddam Hussein without any evidence. The Russians helped him acquire such items, and according to many in the US government they also helped smuggle them to Syria. Many of Saddam’s inside men turned defectors have now became validated in their testimony; hopefully the school of thought will begin to step back and actually smell the coffee. Lest we paint the invasion as some knee-jerk reaction to a few planes hitting sky scrapers in New York (popular belief held by idiots) or a singular lust for oil (ditto), and start to actually acknowledge that thousands of WMD’s don’t have the ability to evaporate, and that in truth there is very little difference between Adolf Hitler & Saddam Hussein – or the ousting of both atrocious dictators. Enough politics; now back to the regular scheduled programme.