|
Henry
McDonald might prove to be correct in his assumption
that the Ba'ath "dictatorship is going out of
business" in Iraq.
Like
the masterminds of Nazi fascism exported all over
the place at the close of W.W.II, the prominent war
criminals in the Ba'ath Party seem for the moment
to have gotten
away quite well. Again?
Since
many of the two million Ba'athists (as of March) are
specialists and intellectuals, and only a minority
are believed to be pro-Saddam, it has already been
deemed unlikely, and unseemly, that Iraq will be purged
of the Party entirely.
Still,
Ba'athism toppled in merely one Arab nation of several
in which it resides, or not, other leadership cults
wearing a myriad of get-ups remain ensconced in
power all over the earth.
It
follows from reading your opinion, Mr. McDonald, to
ask the questions: who should be invaded next
-- with more of the same which you excuse as a "brief
but conventional conflict" -- and by whom?
Your
exiled Iraqi friend, Mr. Khalid Ibrahim, was understandably
emotionally jubilant at "watching his fellow
countrymen and American Marines pull down the statue
of Saddam Hussein in central Baghdad", but what
has that got to do with guarantees of freedom and
liberation for the people of Iraq?
In
all fairness to Mr. Ibrahim, you should ask his opinion
of the
"Al-Chalabi dynasty", and of 'His
Excellency' Mr. Ahmed Chalabi.
You
express anger at what you perceive as Irish anti-war
groups' "arrogant dismissal of facts on the ground
in what was once Saddam's torture chamber."
Then
perhaps you will not arrogantly dismiss
Iraqgate and the facts on the ground, and precisely
how Saddam's statue got to be there.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
