For George Bush, or so it would seem, the war in Iraq could not be more simple. If Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath regime is not in favour of the USA (gaining control of his country’s mineral resources by proxy and establishing a strategic stronghold in the region) then it against Washington and therefore must be eliminated as a threat to national security. This is the simplistic view, for simpletons.
In practice, it gets more complicated. For the Iraqi regime to be eliminated, it is necessary to find a pretext. There weren’t any. Therefore it was necessary to invent one, and they did. First there was Powell’s “hard evidence” that Iraq had WMD (based on the infamous British intelligence report, copied from a 12-year-old text) and then it was the forged documents presented to the UNO, claiming that Niger had exported yellowcake uranium to Iraq illegally, dismissed by Mohamed El-Baradei as forgeries.
On the diplomatic front, the UN Security Council made it clear that it would not support a motion for war due to the lack of pretexts. Hard as they tried, they were not able to find a link between the Iraqi regime and international terrorism, except some obscure groups in Northern Iraq way out of Saddam Hussein’s reach and well within the no-fly zones policed by the USA.
An intelligent decision would have been to realise that there was neither a pretext for war, nor was the moment right for a coup de theatre on the diplomatic stage. However, when people of the calibre of Bush and Rumsfeld are involved, an intelligent decision is not usually forthcoming and in this case, the worst possible course of action was taken.
The USA is committing war crimes in Iraq, the USA is committing acts of murder, the UDSAF is bombing hospitals, killing children, killing civilians while thousands of Iraqis are struggling to enter the country to fight the aggressors.
The American forces are not liberators, they are invaders. If Bush does not respect a democratic forum of law, he acts like a dictator and if his armed forces commit acts of murder in an illegal conflict, then Bush, as Commander-in-Chief of these forces is a war criminal, Bush is a murderer. This is not a question of opinion – it is fact, based upon the principles of international law.
Seen from Bush’s simplistic viewpoint, if he and his administration are not with the principles of international law, they must be against them, as such being a threat to the national security of every nation on earth. If the Bush administration do not use the proper channels of debate, they behave like dictators, as they accuse Saddam Hussein of doing. If Saddam Hussein has sent people to their deaths, so has George Bush, as governor of Texas.
If Iraqi TV shows pictures of American prisoners of war, so does CNN show Iraqi p-o-w-s. If Bush complains that Iraqi soldiers masquerade as civilians, so do CIA operationals working undercover. Neither side is going to sport a target, fix an arrow over their heads with a sign “Look! I’m a danger man! Shoot me!”
In Bush’s simplistic view, the French Resistance were terrorists, fighting against Hitler’s evil fascist forces, Stalin’s scorched earth policy was cowardice.
When a people fights a war to defend their country against aggression, they stand together, they fight with whatever means they have. They are being invaded and in this case, the aggression is illegal.
Bush, the simpleton, is an insult to humanity, an insult to his people and an insult to world history, which will judge him, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Blair, Straw and Hoon as war criminals who tried to destroy the authority of the UNO as a legal forum, disregarded the fundamental principles of diplomacy and flouted international law in an illegal and murderous campaign.
All of the worst fears shared by many about the intentions of the Bush administration were, after all, wholly and very well founded. The Bush administration in its simplistic, criminal and murderous approach to crisis management, has ensured that the USA will be at least regarded with distaste and mistrust in future by the rest of the world, and at worst with bitter hatred, contempt and thirst for revenge.
What is the difference between the murder of an Iraqi by an American pilot or the murder of an American by a fundamentalist? Curiously, before this war was launched, there was no link between Baghdad and Islamic fundamentalism. The Bush administration’s simplistic approach has forged the missing link. Now the American people will face the consequences.
Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY PRAVDA.Ru
Russia, when signing documents for the sale of Alaska to the United States, was realizing her objective benefit
Putin's official spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on remarks in the US media about failures in launching nuclear-capable missiles in Russia