The one guy successful for keeping a lid on Sunni/Shia civil war and daily car bombings and law and order, keeping the hospitals/schools open, the roads repaired and the electricity and plumbing running for 2 decades at least at a 200% better rate than the last 3+ years has been convicted and sentenced for his policies being responsible for crimes against humanity in the 1982 killings of 148 people. A trial and verdict for another 100,000 people is pending.
(Double that if you like and it still stands diminished by at least 50% compared to even the the lowest marginal estimate which has been reported as the number of direct resultant deaths caused by the US invasion of Iraq, even if you were to cut the figures of that report by 200,000 fatal casualties. Applying the same margin of error to the other side of those figures however, the US gets the credit for 800,000 deaths rather than 400,000. The reported average is 600,000 souls. Any way you slice it...we're talking close to a half million souls on one end of the possibility spectrum or close to a million on the other! Hands down in either case a much bigger act of inhumanity than what Sadamm is to be hanged for.)
Meanwhile, in the space of 3+ years, US policy has been directly accountable for the deaths of a reported 600,000 civilians in Iraq (see above) and nearly 3000 Americans, has destroyed a large % of that country's infrastructure, caused the escalation of not only religious infighting but political as well, through out the region, and has been proven just as capable, culpable and deft as Saddam has been for the implementation of "imprisonment and torture" of the Iraqi people.
Given that during Iraq's US supported war against Iran in the 80's Saddam was the President of Iraq and acted against Iranian backed insurgencies and uprisings in his soveriegn nation with no more or less compassion than any world leader in the past historically has offered (see American Civil war)... the US invasion/occupation was a matter of choice on proved questionable cause against a soveriegn nation.
Who would appear to be the more successful peace keeper and the less inhumane of these two defendants?
For far less death and destruction, in his favor, Saddam was at least competent and efficient in securing Iraq and creating order out of chaos for the Iraqis.
We on the other hand, took that order and the involuntary and tragic sacrifices made leading up to it and returned Iraq to a chaos greater than existed prior to the strong handed policies of their last President.
So, tell me. Who's keeping the peace now?
Skip the hype and the character assasination that was generated to justify our invasion, packaged and sold on falsehoods.
Just do the math and more, view the aftermath.
According to findings of the kangaroo court put in place to aid my country in it's mercenary causes and the conquest of a regime, it would certainly seem that in the eyes of justice, having found a way to establish and maintain at least a moderate level of peace in Iraq is a far more henious crime to humanity than destroying it completely on a whim.
As I said, skip the spin. Do the math.
If afterwards you still think we're any less guilty than Saddam for what's been happening in Iraq...you will probably never "get it".
No comments:
Post a Comment