On Saddam…

As would be expected, the blogosphere is awash with tributes and condemnations of Saddam. Heck, some of the tributes are via the condemnation route. There’™s quite a panoply of opinion out there, so I’™ve tried to capture some of the best. Some are really, really, good. And some totally miss the [...]

/wp/

As would be expected, the blogosphere is awash with tributes and condemnations of Saddam. Heck, some of the tributes are via the condemnation route. There’™s quite a panoply of opinion out there, so I’™ve tried to capture some of the best. Some are really, really, good. And some totally miss the point.

By way of background, let’™s start with an entry from BushFlash. All I can say is, ‘œthanks for the memories’. BushFlash wraps up my whole problem with the Bush regime’™s handling of Saddam (and the situation in Iraq in general) in one sweet video retrospective. Don’™t miss it.

Josh Marshall goes off on a rant – it’™s been awhile since we’™ve read an extended editorial from Talking Points Memo – and here’™s an excerpt:

‘¦Marty Peretz, with some sort of projection, calls any attempt to rain on this parade ‘œprissy and finicky.’ Myself, I just find it embarrassing. This is what we’™re reduced to, what the president has reduced us to. This is the best we can do. Hang Saddam Hussein because there’™s nothing else this president can get right’¦

David Caputo writes at OpEdNews:

‘¦It’™s twisted when you think of it. We’™ve gone in and FUBAR’™ed the place so bad that Saddam Freakin’™ Hussein looks like a Professor Emeritus of Urban Planning. Between false flag covert ops and kick-in-the-door raids and the strafing and bombing of civilian targets and the raiding of hospitals we’™ve completely destroyed any possible credibility we might have had in prosecuting Saddam for the many crimes of unspeakable cruelty he undoubtedly committed’¦

Chris Floyd takes a bit of a different approach in dissecting today’™s hanging of Saddam. He goes to the meat of the matter – the U.S.’™s own blemished history in dealing with Saddam, and how the New York Times, in its eulogy to a tyrant, basically gives the Bush cabal a pass in this chapter of global history:

‘¦There is simply no way to understand the reign of Saddam Hussein, nor the past few decades of Iraq’™s history, without including the very real and important role that the United States has played in shaping these realities. The reason that tens of thousands of American soldiers have been killed and maimed ‘” and that hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis have been slaughtered, and millions more plunged into hellish suffering ‘” is because this history has been buried, perverted, ignored or forgotten. And one of the main engines of this deliberately induced national amnesia is the New York Times and its fellow media mandarins.

The singular attribute of all the above remarks? No one is making excuses for or shedding crocodile tears for Saddam. While we may have differing opinions on capital punishment, I don’™t think there’™s anyone who’™s arguing that Saddam wasn’™t a bad guy, and at least worthy of a good hangin’™. An overarching viewpoint, though, is that the media is totally ignoring the decades long complicity of the Bush regime (in all of its present and past lives) in the crimes for which Saddam was convicted and punished.

At some point, Americans have to wake up to the fact that we’™re not the benevolent liberaters in this whole middle eastern passion play, and we never have been. We have one interest and one interest only: oil and the economic interests that flow from beneath the sand. Crude oil is the only middle eastern commodity that ever interested the U.S. oiligarchy. Democratization of the arabic world has never truly been on the agenda (except to the extent that it served the purposes of the barons).

We have to discover the truth ourselves, because we’™ll never be told the truth by our government – and yes, I’™m including both major political parties under this particular umbrella statement. The hands that control the Democratic Party are almost as bloody as those of the GOP.

One can only hope that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have some industrial strength blood remover in their congressional bag of cleaning tools. Either that, or the guts to publicly take the investigation wherever it leads, even if the path ends at the front door of both parties.

Saturday, December 30th, 2006 by Richard Blair |

No Comments

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI