War or peace with Iraq?
www.GlobalAware.org Link
to actual Whitehouse speech!
A virtual interview with George W.Bush
President Bush’s Address to the Nation, justification for war on
Iraq,
The Cross Hall, March 17 2003
…and GlobalAware comment thereon.
by Dr.Leslie Jermyn
I couldn’t bring myself to watch President George ‘Dubya’
Bush last night but I decided that ignoring him wouldn’t make him
or his diabolical plans for war go away. In fact, I came to the conclusion
that he probably wouldn’t even know I was ignoring him and if someone
doesn’t realize he’s being ignored, it’s just not very
satisfying, is it? So, I’m going to pay close attention to Mr. Bush’s
little address and do him the courtesy of thoughtful replies…
Bush: “For more than a decade, the United States
and other nations have pursued patient and honorable efforts to disarm
the Iraqi regime without war. … Since then [end of Gulf War I],
the world has engaged in 12 years of diplomacy.”
So I suppose that dropping bombs on people is diplomacy? Remember that
the UN inspectors were pulled out in 1998 to make way for a bombing campaign
to facilitate Saddam’s ‘diplomatic’ tendencies. In fact,
20 million pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq from December 1998
to September 1999. Since one might argue that diplomacy has a hard time
being effective when running ducking and screaming from armed attack,
that would make it only 7 years of diplomacy by my count. Let’s
not even get into the sanctions which killed hundreds of thousands of
Iraqi children… no those are not acts of war, they are ‘patient
and honourable efforts.’
Bush: “Peaceful efforts to disarm the Iraqi
regime have failed again and again -- because we are not dealing with
peaceful men.”
This is rich coming from the man sitting on the world’s biggest
nuclear armoury, the man who believes in pre-emptive (that means with
no provocation) strikes against enemies. It’s probably pretty darned
difficult to be peaceful if you’re an American president in this
day and age, but that being so, let’s not be coy about it –
there are few ‘peaceful men’ in sight in this drama and the
few who played bit roles are quitting in disgust. Bravo Robin Cook! (Resigned
as Leader of the British House of Commons the day this speech was given)
Bush: “Intelligence gathered by this
and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to
possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. This
regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against Iraq's neighbors
and against Iraq's people.”
I won’t even touch the obvious one here – ‘intelligence’
– that would be cheap and too damned easy. On to the meat of this
statement: Iraq has nasty weapons. Yup, it’s true. How do we know
it’s true despite the bumblings of ‘intelligence’ services?
Because a number of biological labs and weapons manufacturers in the US,
Britain and France have sales receipts detailing the germs and equipment
they sent to Saddam, probably with big pink bows on the boxes. The Brits
were even helping him to build a nuclear arms program. As for his use
of those weapons, we supported Iraq in the Other Gulf War against Iran
and we knew all about his gassing of the Kurds. Thing is, Iran had only
just finished overthrowing an American-backed dictator and holding Americans
hostages and the Kurds, well, we’ve never really given a damn about
them in Iraq or in Turkey where thousands have died under another friendly,
if gruesome, regime.
Bush: “The regime has a history of
reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America
and our friends.”
Reckless aggression in the Middle East… hmmm, that conjures up all
sorts of embarrassing moments in history. Does anyone remember the massacres
of Palestinians presided over by a military Ariel Sharon? In fact, if
we want to identify the top dog for reckless aggression in the Middle
East, we could just stop there, with ‘our friends.’ But let’s
not, how about the various coups that put Saddam in power – every
one of them supported by a US President? What about the Cold War policies
that supported a list as long as my arm of unpopular dictatorships –
some like the Saud Royal Family still in place – to avoid the spread
of Nasser’s Egyptian socialism? Any student of Middle East history
cannot be surprised that there is such hatred of Americans and their friends.
Bush: “And it has aided, trained and
harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.”
Oh. Osama is a Shi’a religious fanatic and Saddam is a Ba’athist
(a secular party), and a Sunni. They don’t like each other and Saddam
would never aid or abet the very thing he fears most: Shi’a Islamic
Fundamentalism among his own Shi’a majority. Osama is probably falling
in love with Saddam’s recalcitrance in the face of Western illegal
actions – the body bags of war will pump up recruitment for his
cause – but this new found relationship is Mr. Bush’s fault
and his alone.
Bush: “The United States and other
nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat.”
‘Deserve’ is a word that should be reserved for deities. No
mere mortal – not even Mr. Bush – has the ‘moral clarity,’
purity or certitude to determine who deserves what when death and destruction
are the punishments. As for ‘invite,’ no, gilt cards were
not mailed to terrorists inviting them to wreak havoc on the world, but
it is hard to know where to begin with the list of ways that the US and
other Western nations have made this world unliveable for millions and
now billions of people. This quote ‘invites’ a rehash of the
last half a century of Cold War conflicts, Western support of murderous
Third World dictators and crimes against humanity (remember Apartheid?),
crushing IMF structural adjustments to insure that Western bankers are
paid, catastrophic destruction of forests, rivers, food supplies and the
earth’s very atmosphere and… well, it really is a long depressing
list. No, we haven’t invited terrorism but we’ve made damn
sure there was fertile ground for them to gather support.
Bush: “Instead of drifting along toward
tragedy, we will set a course toward safety. Before the day of horror
can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed.”
Whose safety? If the enormity of what is about to happen were being done
for my safety, I shudder to think what Mr. Bush would devise to do me
harm! The day of horror is already marked on Mr. Bush’s calendar
and on that day, sometime very soon, 3000 bombs will begin their lightning
descent toward Iraqi targets. Call me ignorant, but I really don’t
see how you drop that much fire power anywhere without doing irrevocable
damage and killing more than a few innocents. Of course, Bush may be planning
to bomb the desert, but since that won’t make Saddam leave Baghdad,
I suspect the bombs are meant for slightly more crowded targets. As for
removing danger by these means, I sincerely fear that a successful attack
on Saddam will embolden American Empire believers and make the world far
less safe from US predations, economic, political and military, than it
is now. As for the terrorists, they too will be emboldened so there will
be danger on all sides. Thank you for thinking of our safety Mr. Bush.
Bush: “One reason the U.N. was founded after
the second world war was to confront aggressive dictators, actively and
early, before they can attack the innocent and destroy the peace.”
If that were really the purpose of the UN, I can think of many worthy
adversaries who have escaped its notice: Pinochet, Mobutu, Suharto, Shah
of Iran, Duvalier Sr. & Jr., Pol Pot, Somoza, Amin, Taylor and Marcos,
just to name a few. The common denominator in this list – well,
apart from being aggressive, attacking the innocent and destroying peace
– is that most of these men were in fact installed and/or supported
by the West. If we remove the word dictator, which means one with absolute
power, we are left with the claim that the UN was founded to actively
confront aggressive leaders before they can attack the innocent and destroy
the peace… hmmm, gives one pause doesn’t it?
Bush: “Yet, some permanent members
of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution
that compels the disarmament of Iraq. These governments share our assessment
of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it.”
No, that’s not exactly what ‘some members’ have said.
They said, to be more precise, that they would not authorize a resolution
with an automatic war trigger attached. That’s what caused the fuss
last fall and what stopped the most recent Anglo-American effort. Of course,
what Mr. Bush means is that without a real threat of invasion, Mr. Hussein
won’t listen, but that’s another kettle of debateable fish
altogether. It’s also a bit cheeky to accuse the French of lack
of resolve. The one thing they’ve shown recently is resolve, it’s
just not the flavour Mr. Bush favours. One almost detects a whiff of the
playground in this last statement… “Scaredy Cat Scaredy Cat,
Nah nah nah nah nah Naaah”
Bush: “…and a broad coalition
is now gathering to enforce the just demands of the world.”
Let’s see, apart from the host of this grand fête, I count
5 debutantes at the ball: UK (if Tony isn’t defrocked before the
first waltz begins), Spain (they won’t send soldiers into battle
so they’re just here as wall flowers), Australia, Bulgaria and Japan
(do they have an army?). In a world with over 200 countries, and even
not counting those who wouldn’t get through the doors if they showed
(North Korea, Iran – no Bush would probably save the first dance
for Iran, uh, can’t really think of anyone else who wouldn’t
be given a corsage), 5 hardly represents a ‘broad’ coalition.
As to the ‘demands of the world,’ on last count, most of us
– including majorities in some ‘broad coalition’ countries
– were hoping for warless spring.
Bush: “Their [Iraq’s] refusal to do
so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing.”
This is silly – who else is choosing this war anyway? Do we get
a world referendum to decide time and date? Hope so, my vote goes to March
20th, 4003 just around cocktail hour – if we last that long…
Bush: “For their own safety, all foreign nationals
-- including journalists and inspectors -- should leave Iraq immediately.”
There’s the ‘s’ word again. I ask, if there are no journalists
there to report what actually happens, will the Iraqis be safe?
Bush: “We will tear down the apparatus of terror
and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.
… The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near.”
I wonder of JFK or Johnson broadcast similar messages as they moved Saddam
ever closer to the throne? I wonder if the Iraqis believe the President
of the United States this time?
Bush: “In any conflict, your fate
will depend on your action. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth
that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any command to use weapons
of mass destruction against anyone, including the Iraqi people.”
Like the Kuwaiti oil wells that belonged to Kuwaitis and are now run by
Chevron? Funny that the first instruction is to save the oil, only secondly
are Iraqis warned off all those weapons of mass destruction that must
just be littering the landscape. This is one of the funniest lines in
the speech, or at least it would be if weren’t so terribly close
to the real priorities of this war.
Bush: “War crimes will be prosecuted.
War criminals will be punished. And it will be no defense to say, "I
was just following orders."”
That must be getting some backs up in US military HQ! But without the
UN and having tried to ‘unsign’ the International Criminal
Court, where will these war crimes get tried anyway? Texas?
Bush: “Should Saddam Hussein choose
confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been
taken to avoid war, and every measure will be taken to win it.”
Excuse me Mr. Bush, I don’t understand, I thought you just said
that you would choose when to go to war? I think it’s a bit disingenuous
to suggest that Saddam will be choosing to initiate this confrontation.
And it’s downright laughable to assure the American people that
‘every measure has been taken to avoid war,’ – yeah,
well except the measure of avoiding war, of course.
Bush: “Yet, the only way to reduce the harm
and duration of war is to apply the full force and might of our military,
and we are prepared to do so.”
Yes, we know about the text flex of Mother of All Bombs muscle, but how
one reduces harm by using full force is counter-intuitive to say the least.
Bush: “Should enemies strike our country,
they would be attempting to shift our attention with panic and weaken
our morale with fear. … We are a peaceful people -- yet we're not
a fragile people, and we will not be intimidated by thugs and killers.
If our enemies dare to strike us, they and all who have aided them, will
face fearful consequences.”
The strangest thing about this statement is that I get an eerie sense
that another leader may be saying pretty much the same thing to his people
right now, dripping with about the same kind of irony…
Bush: “In the 20th century, some chose
to appease murderous dictators, whose threats were allowed to grow into
genocide and global war.”
Did I already use the phrase ‘dripping with irony’? Too bad…
Bush: “Terrorists and terror states
do not reveal these threats with fair notice, in formal declarations --
and responding to such enemies only after they have struck first is not
self-defense, it is suicide.”
Need I remind you Mr. Bush, that you have declined the ‘formal declaration’
route yourself? And, not to nitpick, but striking in response to aggression
is self-defense and if it were suicide, you wouldn’t be there to
strike back anyway so the point is moot. But that’s just pedantry.
To suggest that Iraq or even a nuclear North Korea is or will be capable
of attacking, much less annihilating the West or even the US, is an exaggeration
of elephantine proportions. They could conceivably menace their immediate
neighbours if they wanted to, but forcing the collective death/suicide
of the US is highly unlikely. While no one should ever have their lives
snuffed out by acts of war or terror – ever – the biggest
terrorist tragedy in US history killed 3,216 people – fewer than
were tortured to death by Pinochet, far fewer than died in Gulf War I,
and only about 10% of the number killed every year by guns in the US.
Mind you, it’s 10 times the figure of the number of state executions
in Texas since 1982. But no matter how you add it up, it does not constitute
the ‘suicide’ of America and not one shred of hard evidence
has been produced to link Iraq and Al Qaeda – unless you count the
warmongering propaganda spewed by CNN and Fox News. No that’s just
the best journalism corporate America can own, not evidence.
Bush: “As we enforce the just demands
of the world, we will also honor the deepest commitments of our country.”
Like Kyoto? Like the International Criminal Court? Like the WTO rules
on tariffs and agricultural subsidies? Like the promise to allow poor
countries to market generic drugs to treat AIDS and TB? Oh yes, Mr. Bush,
we all believe that one!
Bush: “The power and appeal of human
liberty is felt in every life and every land. And the greatest power of
freedom is to overcome hatred and violence, and turn the creative gifts
of men and women to the pursuits of peace.”
Now if Gandhi or Kofi Annan or even Jimmy Carter said this, I’d
think it was noble and probably record it in my list of quotable quotes.
(Kudos to the speech writers and spin doctors in Washington.) Coming from
Dubya, I am dumbstruck. Human liberty, indeed, unless you’re Black
and trying to vote in Florida, unless you’re Black in Texas (and
get caught near a white murder victim), unless you had an Arabic name
and were dumb enough to be in the US September 2001 (then you get to rot
in Guantanamo with no trial in sight), and we’ve only scratched
the surface of the liberties enshrined in one nation I can think of. As
for overcoming hatred and violence and pursuits of peace, I’m all
for it, when do we start? Oh right, there’s a big bad war on the
way so we’ll have to postpone this project indefinitely once again,
too bad.
Bush: “Free nations have a duty to
defend our people by uniting against the violent.”
If I hadn’t already proved that Bush drips (unintentional) irony,
I’d swear this was a cry for help – “I’m going
to kill myself, I really am – if you don’t take the gun from
my hands real soon!”… “That’s it, I’m going
to war – someone stop my violent crusade!” Just in case it
is a cry for help, let’s exercise our freedoms and unite against
this war and defend all people from violence. There is another way Mr.
Bush…don’t pull the trigger!
Link
to actual Whitehouse speech!
© Dr. Leslie Jermyn leslie@globalaware.org
Permission is required from the Author to publish this text. |
