PDA

View Full Version : Proof Positive



wrbones
04-08-03, 05:53 AM
New York Post



PROOF POSITIVE

By RALPH PETERS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



April 8, 2003 -- YESTERDAY, our Marines crossed the waters of Babylon, swimming their combat vehicles through river currents to press deeper into Baghdad - and taking the Iraqis utterly by surprise.
The Army's 3rd ID has established an armored presence in the heart of Saddam's capital. The Screaming Eagles of the 101st scoured Najaf and Karbala clean of regime hardliners. Our forces have demonstrated an innovative mastery of urban warfare, embarrassing critics who predicted disaster in the streets.

The Brits broke the regime's last grip on Basra. "Chemical Ali," Iraq's worst war criminal after Saddam himself, lies dead in a pile of ruins. In the north, the sons of the Kurds he once slaughtered are advancing beside the U.S. Army's Special Forces.

Iraq's military has fallen apart. Thugs and party hacks cling to Baghdad. Every day, more and more Iraqis come out into the streets to cheer their liberators.

One terrorist training camp after another has been overrun. Reports stream in of probable chemical weapons stockpiles. Pretending its death rattle is a growl, the dying regime continues to violate every code and convention on warfare.

And Saddam's defenders, on both sides of the Atlantic, have been notably silent.

Where are they now, the voices that cried out that sanctions and inspections were working? Where are the champions of a terrorist regime who ignored the plight of the Iraqi people, insisting they didn't want to be liberated? Why don't we hear from all those who denied any connection between Saddam's regime and terrorism?

Consider the proof that this war was based on sober assessments of real threats:

* A vast terrorist camp in the north that harbored members of Ansar al-Islam, an organization with known ties to al Qaeda, was overrun by Kurdish freedom fighters and U.S. special operations forces. The haul of documents and other evidence was enormous.

* Next, the Marines overran a terrorist training facility south of Baghdad, complete with a commercial aircraft mock-up to train hijackers. The Leathernecks captured extremists from Syria, Egypt and Sudan.

And rumors persist of al Qaeda cells.

What about the insistence by critics that Saddam's weapons of mass destruction were a myth, a mere pretext for U.S. aggression?

* One possible chemical weapons cache after another has fallen to advancing allied troops. While some of the sites may test negative, there are so many reported seizures that there can be no doubt that firm proof of Saddam's relentless WMD program is only a matter of time.

Wisely, U.S. and British authorities have avoided dramatic claims and are waiting for definitive test results. We deliver proof, not rhetoric.

* Intelligence intercepts earlier in the war recorded orders authorizing Iraqi commanders to fire chemical munitions. Such orders are not given if such weapons do not exist. Of course, intelligence sources will always be dismissed by skeptics. So let them wait for the laboratory evidence. In the meantime, any converted "experts" are welcome to go to the head of the line at the strategic confessional.

* As an earlier column spelled out in detail, Iraqi irregulars and death squads have committed a long list of war crimes - most against their own people. Yet, we haven't heard much of late from those who declared that the United States was the world's greatest criminal for going after Saddam.

Forget the French and Germans, to whom honesty is an incomprehensible concept. Ignore the Arabs, with their addiction to comforting lies and a culture of blame. What about our bleeding heart celebrities who were so happy to ignore the bleeding people of Iraq?

Why hasn't the Holier-Than-Thou Club had anything to say about the regime's use of human shields? Or the use of hospitals as military facilities? Or the executions of Iraqi citizens by death squads? Or the mistreatment of prisoners?

Even if all the self-adoring celebs don't really care about the fate of individual human beings (one of the left's greatest sins throughout the past century), what about Saddam's failed attempt to wreck the environment of southern Iraq by blowing up his oil fields? On top of the colossal damage his regime did over the past decade by draining southern Iraq's once-vast marshes?

Let's face it. The Iraqi people had their 15 minutes of fame. Insufficiently loyal to Saddam for Hollywood's taste, suffering Iraqis are yesterday's cause.

But a person has to wonder: As they see Iraqi children running out to welcome our troops, don't any of America's critics, foreign or domestic, suspect they might have been wrong about Saddam's innocence?

Guess not. They've moved on. Not one film star is making an effort to go to Iraq to actually do something for the millions who suffered under Saddam. The antiwar movement was a fad for moral lightweights eager to portray themselves as heroes.

We all know where the heroes are today. They're in Iraq, making history. Not in film studios.

Ralph Peters is a retired military officer and the author of "Beyond Terror: Strategy in a Changing World."

wrbones
04-08-03, 05:54 AM
Chicago Sun Times

BY RICHARD ROEPER SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Advertisement











TO: Jennifer Aniston, George Clooney, Sheryl Crow, David Duchovny, Janeane Garofalo, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Woody Harrelson, Jessica Lange, Michael Moore, Edward Norton, Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Martin Sheen, Eddie Vedder, et al.

RE: Operation Iraqi Freedom

Dear Celebrity Anti-War Activist: Over the last several weeks and months, you have used your status as a person of fame to tell the world you're against the war with Iraq, which you believe to be unwarranted, unethical, unconstitutional and un-American. Some of you have said you "hate" President George W. Bush (hello, Jessica Lange!), while others have expressed mere contempt for the president and his policies.

Even though you are among the luckiest and best-rewarded human beings in the history of civilization, you have moaned long and loud about life in the oppressive United States of America. And you have complained that free speech is practically an endangered species--though it's not as if you've been kidnapped, bound and gagged for expressing your views.

You have talked about how ashamed you are to be an American. You have said you believe this is a war for oil conducted by a power-hungry simpleton in the White House.

You have given speeches at awards ceremonies. You've marched in the streets and held forth at anti-war rallies. You've gone on talk shows and you've written op-ed pieces and you've signed letters and you've flashed the peace sign every time you've gone out in public.

Even after the fighting began and U.S. troops started risking their lives to fight for the very freedoms you've been enjoying--including the right to speak out against government policies--you refused to let the drumbeats of war drown out your voices of dissent.

Fine. You've made your point. And if you want to keep on with the the marching and the protesting and the grandstanding and the speech-making, well God bless America, that's your right.

But I'm just wondering: If you're such a crusader for kindness and decency and the rules of fair play, when are you going to say something about the atrocities committed by Iraqis since this war broke out?

Stop right there. I can already hear you launching into your well-practiced diatribe about how none of these things would be happening in the first place if not for that warmonger Bush--but that doesn't answer my question. My question is, why are you not condemning the unconscionable acts of terrorism committed by Iraqis?

Since the fighting began, American troops have conducted themselves with much honor and courage and have engaged in the traditional rules of war. We've seen story after story about U.S. troops coming to the aid of wounded enemy soldiers, image after image of Americans comforting Iraqi children, quote after quote from American troops expressing deep regret after killing soldiers and civilians who would not surrender or kept charging, even after repeated warnings.

On the other side, some Iraqi soldiers have posed as civilians and faked surrender in order to ambush allied forces. Then there are the suicide terrorists, like the noncommissioned Iraqi officer in civilian clothes who pretended to be a taxi driver and waved to U.S. soldiers for help--only to blow himself up and take four American soldiers with him. We've also seen American POWs mistreated on Iraq TV.

The Fedayeen have been known to use civilians, even children, as human shields. They stage military operations from hospitals. In one incident, Iraqi soldiers fired at a U.S. helicopter that was evacuating wounded Iraqis.

Even if you believe we have no business being in Iraq, you can't possibly endorse any of the tactics used by a significant percentage of Iraqis. They are cowards and they are scum and they are war criminals.

So, Ms. Garofalo and Mr. Sheen and Mr. Moore and Mr. Robbins: Why not hold a press conference to condemn these acts? How about taking out ads in USA Today and the New York Times so you can sign your names to a petition expressing your outrage at this behavior? How about donating your talents to a fund-raiser for the families of fallen American soldiers? At the very least you can update your anti-war speeches to include words of praise for the likes of Jessica Lynch, and words of protest against the Iraqi thugs.

I'm not asking you to march in the streets of Baghdad to protest these atrocities. You can make your point from the comfort and safety of your home turf--the same launching point for all your verbal missiles against the American government.

It won't mean you're against the war. It'll just mean you have a sense of perspective and honor, and that your hatred and contempt isn't reserved exclusively for the president of the United States.

War criminals need loathing, too. Don't be afraid to say it.

Sincerely,

Richard Roeper