Tuesday, January 28, 2003
It is better to be thought a fool...: than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. Actress Susan Sarandon has a commerical out opposing the war with Iraq. Now, there are some reasonable and principled arguments to oppose a war, but it wasn't too long ago that liberals disliked tyrants. Certainly Slobodan Milosevic and his attempted ethnic-cleansing of muslims in Albania qualified.
But that loveable despot, Saddam Hussein isn't worthy of liberals' derision -- after all, unlike someone they despise, he was popularly elected.
In the commercial, Sarandon contends that Iraq's neighbors don't consider it a threat -- ignoring the U.S. and British-maintained no-fly zones and the ever-weakening U.N. sanctions regime. Of course, what happens when Saddam finally gets lucky and shoots down and captures one of our pilots? The status quo is not acceptable. So is Sarandon's answer to abandon it? If so, it won't take long before the recidivistic tendencies of Saddam Hussein take over and 1991 seems like deja vu all over again.
Sarandon also asks the question: "What did Saddam Hussein do to us?"
Some other actor answers the question for her: "Nothing."
But if this were a basic history quiz, Sarandon and her cohorts would fail.
You see, we're still in a state of war with Iraq. The 1991 Gulf War "ended" with a cease-fire contingent on Saddam Hussein disarming. The current standoff is an extension of 1991 so we get to count all of the American soldiers who died in that confilct as part of what Saddam has done to us.
Saddam is also shooting at planes everyday in the no-fly zones. Just because his military is unable to actually shoot down a plane does that make it OK?
Saddam has been writing checks to the families of suicide bombers in Israel who have killed American citizens -- tourists and students both.
Saddam does have links to al Qaeda -- the perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks.
As George Orwell observed, you cannot take a neutral stand against a brutal dictator -- you must choose sides.