The ultimate question of Bush, Iraq, and genocide
I mostly haven’t written about Iraq and I’m going to continue avoiding it for now, but I have written about mass murder. These articles about the court trial of Saddam and his aides for the Anfal mass murders highlight the problems with what some of the blogosphere calls “Bush Derangement Syndrome”. It doesn’t matter how barbaric someone is, if they oppose George Bush then that’s the story. It doesn’t matter what else happens; if it can be spun to show how much of a mistake going into Iraq was, then that’s the story.
The article that brought this rant on is ABC’s report on the trial of Saddam Hussein and some of his aides where they stand accused of the al-Anfal mass murders. The prosecution has video and audio confirmation of Saddam and his aides knowing exactly what they were doing: purging the Kurds by killing them. This was an atrocity that killed at least fifty thousand people, under the direct command of Hussein and for the direct purpose of an ethnic purge, and we’ve just been presented with audio proof that responsibility came from the top. Is that the story? No, that’s buried on page three. The story is (and this is the actual ABC news headline as I write this) “Court Drops Kurd Charges Against Saddam”.
That’s news? He’s dead. My guess is that while the Kurds would like to see him convicted, they’re quite happy with why he won’t be. ABC spends two pages on that obvious issue (minus his victims being happy, mind you), and mentions the video/audio proof in two short paragraphs—paragraphs that don’t mention the numbers killed or Hussein’s acknowledgment of what would happen and why they were doing it. And then, of course, the obligatory “violence continues in Iraq”. I had to go to the Malaysia Star to find out what the video and audio evidence held. Thank god for Google News, but that’s ridiculous.
This single-minded pursuit of one and only one angle reminds me of Douglas Adams’s Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. His philosopher-mice have been searching for the answer to the question of life for millions of years. They know the answer is forty-two. They need to work out a question that fits the answer.
“You see,” he said, “if they’re just sitting there in the studio looking very relaxed and, you know, just mentioning that they happen to know the Answer to Life, the Universe and Everything, and then eventually have to admit that in fact it’s Forty-two, then the show’s probably quite short. No follow-up, you see.”
It doesn’t matter how barbaric someone was, their actions aren’t newsworthy unless it feeds BDS. That’s the answer, and all questions must flow to that answer. Eventually, you would think they would have to admit that in fact Saddam Hussein was a genocidal mass murderer.
- Court Drops Kurd Charges Against Saddam
- “Court Drops Charges Against Saddam for Deaths of Kurds When Trial Resumes After Hanging”
- Saddam and cousin discussed killing thousands—tapes
- “Saddam Hussein and his cousin ‘Chemical Ali’ discussed how chemical weapons would exterminate thousands before unleashing them on Kurds in 1988, according to tapes played on Monday in a trial of former Iraqi officials.”
- Al-Anfal Campaign at Wikipedia
- “The attacks were part of a long-standing campaign that destroyed almost every Kurdish village in Iraq—along with a centuries-old way of life—and displaced at least a million of the country's estimated 3.5 million Kurdish population.”
- The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
- One’s never alone with a rubber duck, you know. This is the most brilliant, inspired nonsensical satire since Lewis Carroll.
More genocide
- A little hypocrisy in Ron Paul reporting
- If you support a hypothetical war against Germany just to end the holocaust how can you oppose the much easier war against Iraq to end the genocide there?
- Hangover on Miracle Monday
- “There is a right and a wrong in the Universe.” So, yeah. Good morning to you, too!
- Taliban revisionism, historical amnesia
- It might not be wrong to leave oppressive murderers in power in other countries. It is wrong to pretend that that isn’t what we’re doing. It is wrong to pretend that apathy in the face of oppression is a noble effort.
- When is it right to stop mass murder?
- The question about the war in Iraq isn’t how many people died. It’s whether or not we can ever be justified in removing another government that engages in mass murders of its own people.
- Hotel Rwanda
- Great movie, great story, great acting on Don Cheadle’s part. You must see this.
More Iraq
- Lessons for new Presidents: Entangling long-term alliances
- How will our foreign policy change after President Obama’s Fortress America?
- President Obama violin concertos console bereaved Iraqis
- President’s iPod an oasis in crisis for the stress of a historic presidency, and the Middle East.
- Will prohibition destroy the Iraq turnaround?
- World prohibition threatens to turn the Iraq turnaround back towards violence and gang warfare.
- It is right to stop genocidal dictators
- “No free nation can remain indifferent to the steady erosion of freedom around the globe. The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.”
- Turning Republicans into heroes
- With the war turning around, filibustering Democratic withdrawal proposals is almost a no-lose situation for Republicans.
- Seven more pages with the topic Iraq, and other related pages
More unreasoning partisanship
- The ruling class’s unexpectedly old clothes
- I recently ran across early use of “unexpectedly” for a conservative’s strong economy, referring to the early 1981 market recovery under President Reagan.
- Why do gun owners think the left wants to take our guns?
- Gun owners think the left wants to take away guns because the left keeps refusing commonsense gun laws in favor of laws that ban guns.
- Corpseman resurrected: correcting Betsy DeVos
- The left has once again decided that the way those people speak is ignorant, and that those people are too stupid to hold public office.
- Why is the country so divided?
- Because you keep trying to tell everyone else what to do.
- Divisive double standards
- It’s a hypocritical form of divisiveness, calling for togetherness and reason whenever your side commits a crime, and engaging in unreasoning partisanship when you can find some way to pin it on others.
- 32 more pages with the topic unreasoning partisanship, and other related pages