George Sada was a general in the Iraqi Air Force and an advisor to Saddam Hussein. The book is partly a memoir and partly a history of Iraq. Unlike the majority of Iraqi�s, General Sada was neither Arab or Muslim. He was of the minority Assyrian ethnic group and was Christian. Saddam apparently trusted him, because, he was not a �yes� man. But while defying Saddam did not cost General Sada his head, it did sometimes cost him his job or promotion.
General Sada asserts that Saddam did have Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and that the UN failed to destroy of them. He also asserts that the Iraqi�s moved the WMD�s to Syria. General Tommy Franks in his memoir AMERICAN SOLDIER, wondered why the news media stated that no WMD�s were found when a booby trap made with a sarin gas artillery shell was found. I also remember reading a letter to one newsletter asking why the news media is saying there were no WMD�s when soldiers have lost their lives trying to disarm these weapons. In addition a UN report cited in Sada�s book confirmed the existence of WMD�s. So, General Sada is not alone is asserting that there were WMD�s When different sources say similar things, it is time to take notice. One should also notice that the Democrats who now oppose the war, at one time stated Saddam had WMD�s as late as 2003. Perhaps these people have a case of amnesia.
Instead of risking the lives of our precious soldiers, why not use the Art Buchwald test? Buchwald , a liberal humorist, once suggested putting conservative presidential candidate Barry Goldwater out in a rowboat and firing a missile at Goldwater, since Goldwater said our missiles were no good. Well why not put all those people who said there were no WMD�s in a rowboat and unleashing the weapons found on these people? If nothing happens, the we can say Bush lied. If the weapons work, these people will have to admit that Bush was telling the truth.
I guess one lesson, I learned from Georges Sada�s book is that sometimes one has to use military force. Diplomacy and sanctions failed to weaken Saddam. Unlike the Serbian leader Milosevic, Saddam had plenty of oil to bribe UN officials to make a mockery of the sanctions. The only people who suffered as a result of the sanctions were the ordinary Iraqis. Saddam, by contrast enriched himself and continued to amass weapons. There was even an attempt to buy nuclear weapons directly from China. Since the solution of the �anti war� crowd is to look the other way while people get killed, why don�t they volunteer to be killed? Perhaps the so called anti-war crowd, would prefer to bury its head in the sand and pretend that the threat posed by Saddam would go away. But history has shown that appeasement does not work. And if memory, serves me correctly, this so called anti war crowd called for intervention in former Yugoslavia and was noticeably silent when Clinton bombed the living daylights out of the Serbs. Surely the war in Yugoslavia is also proof that diplomacy alone is not adequate.
Guy
# posted by GuyTak @ 9:31 AM
