April 17, 2003
Every Bob Scheer column reads like it's a bad flashback from a 1968 LSD experience. Could any of his loved ones please tell this man that the Vietnam War is still over? In this week's public seizure, Hanoi Bob is visibly disoriented by the rapid collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime. Is he happy or sad that the torture chambers were closed and the emaciated political prisoners were set free? He doesn't say. He is concerned about something more important than the human rights of the Iraqi people. He has found a pretext for criticizing the Bush administration:
History? What History?
Allowing the looting of Iraq's museums is another indication of our contempt for the Mideast — and our unfitness to rule it
First of all, it's far from clear that the museum wasn't already picked clean by the fleeing members of the Tikrit mafia before we even got to Baghdad. But Bob is very close to making sense for once. One can retool his above argument to get the following:
The Saudi/Iraqi/Iranian/Syrian/Egyptian/Libyan/etc. dictators' looting of their countries' national wealth and the repression, torture and mass murder of their subjects is another indication of their contempt for the Mideast -- and their unfitness to rule it.
Go get 'em, Bob.
[Note: the archived version
of the column may not contain the "History? History?" quote which is in the temporary version on his home page
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 17, 2003 11:46 AM
New comments may be posted only from the 'Comments' links at the bottom
of each entry on the blog home page
A valid point is made when referring to what sort of government will arise in Iraq. A democracy is not advisable because that is simply majority rule and must be avoided like the plague. This is why a democratic system in the form of a constitutional republic was established by the Founding Fathers in America. Nobody wanted to follow Athens.
Therefore in Iraq what is important is the political philosophy to be followed. A good PP will best ensure that irrational systems do not arise.
The system should be a capitalistic one. Pure capitalism will not be allowed to be implemented by the United States or Britain and definitely not Europe because they are all contra-capitalist at best, favoring statism. It is only the US Constitution protects America from rampant statism.
So the US should Xerox a copy of our system and advise on its implementation. Iraq is a perfect candidate especially given its fractured nature. A Lebanon or Yugoslavia situation should try and be avoided.
But unfortunately, America does not believe in its system in the same way the Founding Fathers did. It has become a self-sacrificing apologist for capitalism - what remains of it in the US.
It is anybody's guess what for Iraq will take. Heaven forbid it will jeopardise the Bechtel and Halliburton contracts worth so much to the Bush Administration.
The reason for the Iraqi war is a disgusting blight that will one day be recognized as such. This does not mean it was not the right thing to do, but for another reason. The reason initially used and then cast out by the Bush Administration. That of self-defense.
The casting out of that reason is why the Bush Adminitration must now be investigated. Where is the secret pre-war evidence? Let us see that it was so convincing. This war was waged and supported based on the word of a President.
That he changed the reason for the war makes me uncomfortable.
Iraqi liberation does not justify sacrifcing the lives of American soldiers.
The pre-war evidence is more important than any other. It does not matter whether evidence is found or not.
Iraq being a stratocracy had no rights in the matter. A free country is morally entitled to invade, but not obligated.
So let us see the pre-war evidence that was so convincing, and answer the question Pres. Bush: why did "liberation" suddenly become the raison de guerre?