February 5, 2003
Text of the presentation to the U.N.’s Security Council open meeting on the situation in Iraq, as delivered by United States Secretary of State Colin Powell
MORE:
Give Us a Chance to Build a Democratic Iraq (BARHAM A. SALIH, February 5, 2003, NY Times)
When Colin Powell appears at the United Nations today, he is expected to talk about Iraq's efforts to build weapons of mass destruction and its ties with terrorist organizations.Posted by Orrin Judd at February 5, 2003 12:38 PMThose are excellent reasons for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. As we all know, there are other powerful reasons, too--most notably the desire of my people to be free from repression and to plant the seeds of democracy in soil that has for too long been given over to tyranny.
In my office in Sulaimaniya, in the part of Iraq already free from Saddam Hussein's control, I meet almost every day with travelers from Baghdad and other parts of Iraq. Without exception they tell me of the continued suffering inflicted by the Iraqi regime, of the hope secretly nurtured by so many enslaved Iraqis for a free life, for a country where they can speak without retribution.
Most of my Iraqi compatriots--Shiite and Sunni Arab, Turkmen and Assyrian, Muslim, Christian and Yazidi--have been united by what they have endured under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party. They want the overthrow of a regime that used chemical weapons against the Kurds and wasted a nation's natural resources on wars rather than schools. They want democracy in Iraq. These are goals worthy of the world's support.
I'd bet Howell Raines is choking on his cornflakes this
morning.
And while I seldom turn on the TV, I did watch about 5 minutes of Powell today. The camera cut away to the French ambassador, who looked as if he had been forced to drink California wine.
Here's all we need say about what Howell Raines hath wrought: when the European democrats had a letter of support for the U.S. they ran it in the Journal. When the Iraqi ambassador was just denying they'd used gas in Halanja he cited the editorial page of the Times.
Posted by: oj at February 5, 2003 2:15 PMHalabja
Posted by: oj at February 5, 2003 2:16 PMThe reaction to the speech on Belgian television was predictable : "No conclusive evidence... old stuff... America is trigger happy... unelected cowboy... the French don't give in to the American threats though". They carefully avoided to show the strongest evidence and the best parts of Powell's speech.
After this vile nonsense, it got even worse. A long excerpt from the infamous interview with Saddam by British dimwit Benn, in which Saddam tells so many lies that even Goebbels would be awestruck. And a report from their own guy in Baghdad, who drove to Basra today. Of course, all Iraqis he interviewed declared their love for Saddam and their hatred for the US. And they asked for baksheesh, I presume.
So old Barham wants our government's help. I hope someone sends him a bio of Ngo Dinh Diem.
Posted by: Derek Copold at February 5, 2003 4:10 PMDerek:
That's the spirit! If y'all just keep saying the next war is the next Vietnam, sooner or later you'll be right.
Isn't one all it takes?
However, if you prefer, there are some other people we tried to "help" who are instructive. We have the Pelahvi dynasty. Let's not forget the Iraqi monarchy, whom we sold out to the Ba'athists now in power. Then, of course, there's King Farouk of Egypt, whom we tossed aside for Nasser (great choice that!). Milosevic was our pal at first, but then we changed our mind. Then there's the Lebanese we ran out on in '82, a lot of good we did them. How about Anastacio Samoza or Bautista? If we want to really reach back, we have the example of Poland, Czechloslovakia and the rest of Eastern Europe, all sold out at Yalta. Then there's Greek democracy in '74, cut loose in favor of the "the colonels." There's Kurdish activists, Tibetan rebels, Montagnard fighters, Angolans, Somalis and so many, many more our dear government has sent down the river when it suited them.
There's a good reason for the saying: it's more dangerous to be America's friend than its enemy. Let's hope for Sayid Barham's sake, he tough enough to survive our goodly assistance.
Kurdish activists? You mean like Salih?
Posted by: Timothy at February 5, 2003 6:46 PMDerek:
You're preaching to the choir--we should have fought to preserve them all. I thought you opposed the war though?
Mr Copold:
Short answer is the Cold War forced the US to support a number of bad governments who could guarantee stability and resist communism.
It's not something to be celebrated but I guess the end goal was worth it.