Sunday, February 16, 2003[posted by jaed at 9:25 PM]
"My goodness, Mabel! The wogs are restless!"
It seems the anti-war movement (or at least the British movement) is belatedly noticing that the Iraqis don't love their Glorious Leader so much that they're eager to keep him. They're even willing to disagree (the nerve!) with the said movement's assertion that Bush - indeed, America - is far, far worse than Saddam Hussein. The Guardian has
The conclusion the Iraqi opposition has reluctantly reached is that there is no way other than war to remove a tyrant whose five secret police forces make a palace coup or popular uprising impossible. As the only military force on offer is provided by America, they will accept an American invasion.
This is their first mistake. American and British power is always bad in the eyes of muddle-headed Left, the recent liberations of East Timor, Sierra Leone and Kosovo notwithstanding.
Then the uppity wogs compound their offence and tell their European betters to think about the political complexities....
and the Telegraph has a news article quoting Iraqis, of whom there are a fair number in Britain:
The people on the anti-war march, they don't seem to realise, they don't have any idea what Saddam Hussein is like, the massacres, the genocides he has committed.
I am supporting a war against Saddam Hussein. It's not a war against Iraq - it is a war against Saddam. It doesn't seem to be a point that many people on the anti-war march are making.
Now, I do not favor fighting this particular battle because it will free the Iraqi people - I regard it, instead, as a good side effect of acting to protect ourselves. What these people say is not something that leaves me unmoved, exactly, but it's not why I take the position I do.
But the antiwar movement advertises itself as the voice of caring for the innocent Iraqis. Our safety is of less moral importance than theirs. Fine.
Do you think they're safe under Saddam Hussein?