Skip to main content

The Anfal Campaign

From the Washington Post,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082100959.html

Months later, the first of eight waves of the Anfal campaign was launched, lasting until the end of 1988 and moving systematically across northeastern Iraq. The military bombarded villages, sometimes with mustard gas and nerve agents, then sent in troops to raze the communities. Families were taken to camps by the truckload, while in some cases men were executed on the spot, the rights group's report said.

THE CAMPS: Tens of thousands were taken to prison camps in northern and central Iraq, where men and boys were separated from their families. Most of the males disappeared, executed by firing squad and buried in mass graves. Women, children and elderly were held for months in crowded, unsanitary conditions that caused further deaths, according to Human Rights Watch."

This was precisely Hitler's "final solution" to the "Jewish problem". Please bear in mind that Saddam Hussein is the man with whom the American leftists / progressives / socialists wanted us to "negotiate" with. This is the man who only 2 years later would invade Kuwait - and he would have invaded Saudi Arabia had the US not intervened.

Those who harp on that we should not have invaded Iraq because "there were no WMDs" are missing the point.

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction. Having someone so callously indifferent to human life at the head of a nation with massive oil wealth, who turned that wealth into genocide, is intolerable. His mere existence as a dictatorial head of state, in charge of those kinds of assets, was a constant threat to all free peoples.

There is also a broad misconception about the Iraq conflict:

There have actually been two wars in Iraq. We won the first war in one month, overturning the Hussein regime. The second war started some months after that, as Islamic fascists moved in and took advantage of the security vacuum to start slaughtering civilians and US troops for their own agenda - an agenda which has nothing to do with Saddam Hussein.

Some of the Islamofascists were homegrown in Iraq - for example, Muqtada al Sadr, head of one of the largest private militias and a thorn in the side of the US since we went to Iraq. Some of them were imported - from Iran (who is providing support to al Sadr), al Qaeda, and enterprising terrorist upstarts from all over. Some smaller number of fascists were Friends of Saddam, elements of the old regime, getting support, money and intelligence from the friendly also-Ba'athist regime in Syria.

Islamofascists started a new war, a second Iraq war, against the United States in mid-2003. At the time we failed to properly deal with this new threat. The borders with Syria and Iran flowed with money, weapons, and young Islamic sheep looking for their 72 virgins in heaven.

The Left keeps passing lies about this conflict. They want Americans to believe that the "resistance" is composed of simple, honest Iraqi men who only want the US to leave and then will live in peace. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, at this point many factions are vying for control of Iraq and its oil wealth - and all of them want to turn that wealth into weapons to use against infidels everywhere - just like papa Saddam was doing.

This war can be won - and this war MUST be won, for that reason. Losing in Iraq means that Islamic terrorists will have gained a fantastically dangerous weapon to use against us - a state.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Murder in the US

In 2011, I calculate the overall US murder rate as 4.6 per 100,000 population.

But if you recalculate this, and assumed that black men murdered at the same rate as everyone else, the overall rate would drop to 1.9 out of 100,000 population. That would give the United States the 147th highest murder rate in the world - or, the 60th best.

The insane disproportionate murder rate among US blacks is why the overall US murder rate seems so high.

I don't understand why liberals refuse to talk about this. I don't understand why blacks refuse to talk about this. Blacks are just as often the victim as the offender - almost SIXTY PERCENT of murder victims in the US are black. Shouldn't they care about this? Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to talk about this? Yet they are silent.

And it's not like this is any secret. This culture of violence, abuse of women, and plain thuggery is paraded around daily in pop music. It's glorified on TV shows like "The Wire…

The Root of Violent Extremism

We are too flippant about writing off violent extremists as "crazy", "psychopathic", etc.

Just because *we* have a hard time conceiving of doing violence to others, does not mean that those who do are insane.

Hitler was not insane. Hitler was evil. There is a distinction.

To be insane, to be "crazy", means you cannot understand the difference between right and wrong.

People like Hitler, like ISIS, these people are *evil*. They have, in what they believe to be a rational process, *chosen* to embrace a death-worshipping morality.

Such thinking is going to lead us down wrong alleys in dealing with violent political extremism.

Unless we understand the various reasons why such people embrace philosophies of death, we cannot combat the root causes and defeat violent extremism.

Obama's "they need jobs" is a juvenile approach at this. But you simply cannot ignore and dismiss the reality of life in the countries that are the flash-points of extremism…

Transparency needed in investigations of police

I have not sat on a grand jury any time in my life. I am disinclined, having not pored through records, nor listened to dozens of witnesses, to second-guess the difficult decisions these jurors have had to make.

HOWEVER. There is a clear problem of trust going on, and it stems from a couple different sources.

1) Grand Juries are usually secret. There are good reasons for this. Simply investigating whether a crime might have occurred, which is what Grand Juries do, collects a lot of evidence which could put people's lives at risk, or could be embarrassing. You want folks to feel free to talk. And you don't want the person being investigated to get unduly smeared.

However, the flip side of secrecy is that the lack of transparency can lead to a loss of trust. Clearly, in the two incidents discussed recently, many people who have no idea what went on in the GJ's or what evidence was presented, know, they just KNOW, an injustice was committed! And, because they have no opportun…