Monday, November 06, 2006

Inconvenient Justice



Shiite militants celebrate Saddam’s sentencing in Sadr City. You can bet that these militiamen won’t thank the US for bringing the dictator to justice. Note the obsolete rifle held aloft by the main figure. The weapon is more useful for killing unarmed civilians than fighting well-armed US troops. It’s no small wonder why the Mahdi Army got mauled in Karbala and Najaf.

When Al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed, Bush’s critics were not pleased. Democratic Congressman Pete Stark declared that the killing was performed, “just to cover Bush’s (rear)”. While another Democratic Congressman (Dennis Kucinich) contemptuously stated that the White House “can spin it all they want”. It’s as if he believed that there was no significance in the death of the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Even more bizarre was the statement of Michael Berg, the father of an American civilian (Nick Berg) who is believed to have been killed by Zarqawi. He was quoted as saying, “Zarqawi is a human being. He has a family who are reacting just as my family reacted when Nick was killed, and I feel bad for that. I feel doubly bad, though, because Zarqawi is also a political figure…”

A political figure? Was he elected to office?

Following a successful countrywide referendum on a new Constitution, a permanent National Assembly was created in Iraq’s first truly fair elections in their entire history. Now this government has finally sentenced Saddam Hussein to hang by the neck for one of his many crimes against humanity.

Even before the verdict was announced the conspiracy accusations began flying. Saddam’s defense attorney, Khalil al-Dulaimi, begged to postpone the sentence because he claimed it was timed to boost President Bush for the mid-term elections. It is not Bush’s fault that the trial is over and Saddam was found guilty for his reprisals in the wake of the Dujail assassination attempt. The crime was committed by Saddam and he should pay for it. Yet Bush critics didn’t hesitate to hop on the bandwagon and spew the typical anti-Bush fare.

The Huffington Post chimed in with an article that rehashes a tired leftwing argument based on moral relativism. Joan Shore blurted out, “How can anyone in a civilized world justify or condone what has happened? Invading (preemptively) a sovereign nation, occupying it, capturing its leader, setting up a kangaroo court, and sentencing him to hang for crimes against his own people...

Did we dare do this with Idi Amin, with Joseph Stalin, with Chou En-lai, with Pol Pot?”


First off, this sovereign country invaded another sovereign country, Kuwait.

Secondly, what is so evil about bringing a criminal to justice?

Third, today Iraq is ruled by a legitimate government while Saddam seized power in a bloody purge.

Finally, I wonder about the maturity of Bush critics. What the hell does Idi Amin, Joe Stalin or anyone else have to do with Saddam Hussein? Why must we be continually subjected to these immature arguments that claim a dictator was unfairly treated because he was made to pay for his crimes while other dictators aren’t. The only relevance that argument presents is that we aren’t bringing enough dictators to justice.

Yesterday a BBC opinion piece hopefully declared that this verdict will have little impact on the American elections. The article asks, “Was it an election ruse, bearing the mark of Karl Rove, the President’s chief strategist?”

Herein lies the rub. Even if the verdict occurred in June it would still be labeled as a cover-up or as some other injustice by Bush’s critics, just like Zarqawi’s death was. The anti-Bush crowd channels everything that happens in Iraq into any possible means that can be used against the President. In their minds the conviction and sentencing of Saddam Hussein is no cause for celebration because it will benefit President Bush. This is why they obsess so much over the verdict’s importance to the elections. They can only see boogey men at work behind the timing because it upsets their propaganda which paints President Bush as the real criminal.

Since anti-Bush activists are busy making victims out of Iraqi Baathists, Al Qaeda and the Taliban - Saddam Hussein’s guilt introduces a hefty dose of reality that disturbs their worldview. It makes them quite uncomfortable.

13 comments:

Freedomnow said...

Sorry AC, I had to write about this and couldnt finish my post about Venezuela's failed bid for a UN seat.

Its 3am and I am tired.......

Russet Shadows said...

We can sense their discomfort by the quantity of their sputtering (there is no quality in sputtering, for it is all the same banal same)!

You are dead right in that the timing was irrelevant and would be spun against Bush no matter when it occurred. Moreover, the spin presumes such Godlike powers of the American president that he can arrange even the smallest things so as to benefit him personally. This reflects the Democrat's theological obsession with the presidency and their basic tribal mentality. Democrat as president = all is well with the world; Republican as president = the man is the devil incarnate. The Islamists have a tribal mentality as well which explains why they and the left get along so well.

Freedomnow said...

Of course, like the US and Russia during WWII it will only last as long as they have a common enemy, Republicans.

Whenever the Democrats regain the presidency they will become enemies with the Islamists again, but they will deal with them with a weaker hand than ever before.

Its a pity that its a hand that they will deal themselves.

Anonymous said...

Looking for sense in the musings of the far left is an effort in futility. If one reads their insanity they side with every enemy of America.

I am certain the usual suspects will start Borat like excuses for the verdict. Unlike Borat whose vitriol is satire the far left's venom is genuine.

Freedomnow said...

Like you suggest, this is one big Pavlov's dog experiment by terrorists.

They target innocent civilians to manipulate public opinion.

The gullible among us willingly collaborate with the aims of terrorism.

The smart amongst us become exasperated and give in to the desire to find an “easier” solution.

The stubborn are not intimidated...

Always On Watch said...

The anti-Bush crowd channels everything that happens in Iraq into any possible means that can be used against the President.

Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Do these fools realize how stupid and paranoid they appear?

Beak has it exactly right, IMO:

Looking for sense in the musings of the far left is an effort in futility. If one reads their insanity they side with every enemy of America.

nanc said...

o.t. - fern? did you see that dante at autonomist is indeed, rocco dipippo? he's now in iraq.

Freedomnow said...

That’s amazing! Rocco rules!!!

By the way, I should explain my statement that I made earlier because it was way too subtle.

I said;

“Like you suggest, this is one big Pavlov’s dog experiment by terrorists.

They target innocent civilians to manipulate public opinion.

The gullible among us willingly collaborate with the aims of terrorism.

The smart amongst us become exasperated and give in to the desire to find an “easier” solution.

The stubborn are not intimidated...”


"Stay the course" can sound ignorant to someone who is reasonably intelligent and such people may foolishly believe that a change of strategy is necessary. However, terrorists are using mindless violence for that very reason.

Through terror and disenchantment, the goal is to shake the will of their enemy. The easy solution that these “smart” people are looking for doesn’t exist. Doing the right and necessary thing is not always the easy thing to do. Intelligent people usually take the lazy way out if they think they have a choice. It is natural for humans to avoid pain and discomfort. That is exactly what terrorists are hoping for.

Congressman Murtha wants us to withdraw to neighboring countries, but that would turn nearby countries into war zones and spread the conflict. Upon a clear US defeat in Iraq Islamists will be further inspired to continue to attack US troops in Muslim countries and no Muslim country will host US troops anymore. We will be evicted from the Middle East and Islamists will have free reign.

Peace activists would be thrilled with the prospect of US troops out of the Middle East. However, the achievement of this goal will lead to further warfare and a inevitable Islamist victory. Islamists are fighting wars from Nigeria to Sudan to Ethiopia to Israel to Iraq to Chechnya to Afghanistan to India to Thailand to Indonesia to the Philippines. Just connect the dots.

To change a successful strategy in exchange for a foolish reactionary one is suicidal.

If someone would like to argue that this strategy is not successful I would relish the opportunity to discuss this further.

nanc said...

i would only venture to argue with you in private if the need arises. however, i believe you're correct. we must stay the course - this is like marriage (oh no, a nancanalogy!) - one doesn't walk away because the husband burns the salad! no!

you stick it out - more on this later...just as soon as i find a recipe for burnt salad...

that is so cool about mr. dipippo - he is freakin' awesome - i did rib dante (ha-imagine an italian guy named rocco naming himself anything else!) just a smidgen and then calderon came in and gave me what for - like i'm scared of him!!!

Freedomnow said...

Our strategy has produced tangible results that have seen a real Democracy take root in a country that has been dominated by fascists for many decades. Critics said we couldn’t do it, but we did.

What other solutions have the Democrats offered? Besides withdrawal, just about everything they have suggested we are already doing.

…And we are doing it well. Let’s give our troops more credit!!!!!!!!!

nanc said...

our troops are the best!

Brooke said...

Happy blogosversary!

I loooove the pic with Kerry and Murtha holding a gun to Uncle Sam. That just about sums up the entire left.

Freedomnow said...

Looks like you clicked on the wrong post, but you definitely typed up the right comment (at least in my eyes!)