This war plan forces me to stand by the dictator who tortured me.

September 18, 2002 7:34 AM

This war plan forces me to stand by the dictator who tortured me. Iraqi writer, an exiled dissident and victim of Hussein's regime speaks against war and sanctions: "You are "either with us or against us", they say. As an Iraqi that means choosing between war and the dictator. To be on the side of the oppressed does not mean we are unaware of the complexity of the situation. To campaign for the lifting of sanctions, for an end to the paralysing bombardment and daily threat of war is to stand by the Iraqi people; it is that policy which will help them to change the oppressive regime. Any change should be initiated from within Iraq, not imposed by Bush or Blair."
posted by talos (11 comments total)

For an alternative perspective - also from a woman (living in the US) that escaped Iraq ... here's number of quotes from an article in the WSJ a week or two ago (can't link to the article, the WSJ is paid subscriber-only).
posted by MidasMulligan at 8:05 AM on September 18, 2002

I'm beginning to wonder if maybe bush is really trying to bring about the end times or something. I mean, he's basicaly playing right into bin-ladens hands.

A war between cultures. what fun this'll be!
posted by delmoi at 8:21 AM on September 18, 2002

One might consider the possibility that all the Bushy saber rattling is accomplishing exactly what was desired of it - to get the UN off its ass and get weapons inspectors back in Iraq without resorting to war. I know a goodly amount of active duty and reserves military (and they are mostly the duking-it-out-with-charlie types, not the logistics and support people) and they are not exactly quitting their day jobs in anticipation of deployment. Imagine: if the UN successfully gets weapons inspectors back in Iraq, Bush can back down gracefully from the war-talk he's been issuing, by saying "Hey, it's just like we said all along, we simply wanted Iraq to start behaving, that's all." He defangs his critics who say he wants war no matter what (ie, to finish Daddy's job), he reconciles with European anti-war leaders, he never has to actually deploy troops while getting what he wants, and he totally justifies further action if necessary. Personally, that UN speech was a pretty good piece of politicking, imo.

I don't know that this is the case, but I do see a lot of people ascribing very simplistic motives and aims to a group of very complicated, sophisticated people. You and I can crow all day long about how Bush, et al are stupid/evil/etc, but the reality is that they are not at all stupid, nor are they without experience in the wielding of power and influence in the achieving of long-term political goals, nor are they inexpert the realm of manipulating public opinion. Politicians LIKE to be underestimated, because it gives them operational elbow-room.
posted by UncleFes at 8:59 AM on September 18, 2002

Leftists and peace activists pushing for arms verification in Iraq

Democracy Now - 9/16/02 - Norman Solomon meeting in Baghdad
Norm Solomon, Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz, U.S. Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) and former senator James Abourezk from South Dakota.

Democracy Now - 9/17/02 - Interview on Baghdad meeting

George Galloway, British MP in Baghdad.
Former Sen. James Abourezk (D-S.D.)
Phyllis Bennis, Institute for Policy Studies and editor of "Beyond the Storm: A Gulf Crisis Reader" and author of the forthcoming "Before & After: U.S. Foreign Policy and the September 11 Crisis."

Australian Broadcasting Corporation - 9/16/02 - Dr Joe Cirincione - (More on CEIP inspections plan.)

9/14/02 - U.S. Peace Delegation Lands in Iraq, Criticizing Moves Toward War, Pressing for Inspectors' Return - Alternet
posted by sheauga at 9:03 AM on September 18, 2002

UncleFes: if Bush's plan is to liberate Iraq without resorting to war, then I would be absolutely delighted. Or if, as MidasMulligan suggests, the Iraqi people themselves will be given by the US the support they need to overthrow Saddam and set in motion a true democracy, then I would be happy.

But this kind of humanitarian pursuit is yet to be borne out in our attitudes towards Iraq. I'd like to see, for example, a weakening of the sanctions, so that the Iraqi people can once again enjoy such items as musical instruments and pencils. I wouldn't be too unhappy about a military squad being sent out to assassinate Hussein. In reality, though, America will want to be extra sure that whoever takes his place is enough of a puppet to maintain stability in the oil world. I think a significant military presence in the Middle East will be required to ensure that Arabs throughout the reason understand that the US is boss, not the people.
posted by skylar at 10:16 AM on September 18, 2002

There are good reasons and bad reasons to go to war with Iraq. Both sets of reasons are being considered, and both sets will influence people.
posted by cell divide at 10:22 AM on September 18, 2002

For an alternative perspective - also from a woman (living in the US) that escaped Iraq ... here's number of quotes from an article in the WSJ a week or two ago (can't link to the article, the WSJ is paid subscriber-only).

And as usual, the question still unanswered by the WSJ, Bush, and his supporters is this: when are you planning the military invasions of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Indonesia, Peru, and China? (To name just a few countries where "alternative perspectives" on human rights violations abound.)

...if the UN successfully gets weapons inspectors back in Iraq, Bush can back down gracefully from the war-talk he's been issuing, by saying "Hey, it's just like we said all along, we simply wanted Iraq to start behaving, that's all."

Unfortunately for that theory, what Bush has been saying all along is NOT "we simply wanted Iraq to start behaving". Were Iraqi "behavior" the sole issue, and were Bushies consistent, we'd have expected the current level of sabre-rattling from day one of the Bush administration.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 10:40 AM on September 18, 2002

"So we're all like, "Hey, let weapons inspectors back in!" and they're all like, "Dude, you pulled out, inspectus interruptus was your idea from the last time you bombed, and you're like spying on us anyway!" and we're all like "Shyeah, as if, let us in or we bomb you!" and they're all like "This is sooo like just a pretext, we say yes and you'll find something else!" and we're like "No, dude, we swear, no pretext and we're serious and we have lots of bombs!" and they're all like "Let me talk to Kofi okay?" and Kofi's all like "Yo, yo, dude!, they mean business and they have bombs fer sher, we've seen 'em!" and they're all like "Jeez, okay already, your inspectors that you pulled out anyway can come in again" and now we're all like "Psyche, dude! Too late! Not good enough! Give us a minute to think of more demands before we bomb you anyway!" So like, what I want to know is, isn't that the very definition of pretext?" - Pen-Elayne
posted by sheauga at 11:43 AM on September 18, 2002

In 1990, the Iraqi regime occupied Kuwait, and the US and UK decided Saddam had breached his contract of employment.

She uses her words very well.
posted by Shane at 11:59 AM on September 18, 2002

And as usual, the question still unanswered by the WSJ, Bush, and his supporters is this: when are you planning the military invasions of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Indonesia, Peru, and China?

"As usual"? Hhmmm. A woman in the FPP says Saddam is a brutal dictator, but thinks it is up to the Iraqi people to overthrow him. She opposes military intervention by the US/UK. Alternatively, an equally passionate woman says that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but that not only does she invite the US to engage him, she believes it is necessary if he is to be overthrown.

These are two differing persepctives, from women of similar backgrounds, on a very particular issue. Neither woman mentioned "Saudi Arabia, Syria, Indonesia, Peru, and China". They also didn't mention Afghanistan, South Africa, genetically modified corn, the spotted owl, or global warming. Because that's not what they were talking about. That may - "as usual" - be what you want to talk about, but you must forgive them both if they are sorta fixated solely on Saddam Hussain just now.
posted by MidasMulligan at 12:49 PM on September 18, 2002

A handsome spotted owl from Iraq.
Iraqi dissident spin.
posted by sheauga at 7:04 PM on September 18, 2002