Peace for Americans and Iraqis in 2004 -- thanks to Bush's courage and vision

By Mary Mostert

As we enter Christmas week, in which we celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace, a brief perusal of the anti-war websites on the Internet illustrate that the possibility of peace is apparently not at all welcome to the anti-war crowd.

We are being treated to outrage expressed by anti-war writers and scattered demonstrators about how inhumanly Saddam Hussein was "treated" as he was cleaned up, shaved and de-liced by his American captors. Justin Raimondo, writing for Anti-war.com, wrote of Saddam's capture:

"If anyone in the West doubts that this display was meant to humiliate and degrade the defeated Iraqi dictator, then the Iraqis present at Paul Bremer's press conference the other day, during which the video of Saddam's 'medical examination' was shown for the first time, had no doubts. Just listen to their Banshee screeching and cries of savage triumph as Saddam is ritually abused.

"It was a cold, calculated act of sadism. Choosing to broadcast images of a werewolfish Saddam being shorn of his beard, his mouth opened and examined — for what? Drugs? Bombs? Cavities? — was part and parcel of the Americans' 'shock and awe' campaign. A phony 'medical examination' became a symbolic subjugation in which Saddam represented an entire people. As Egyptian writer Sayyid Nassar put it:

" 'I felt extremely humiliated. I felt it was not only a humiliation of Arabs but of all humanity. By shaving his beard, a symbol of virility in Iraq and in the Arab world, the Americans committed an act that symbolizes humiliation in our region, where getting shaved by one's enemy means robbing him of his will. It's also a humiliation for all Arab leaders and a message telling them that he who does not enter the poultry yard of the Americans will experience the same fate.'

"As Saddam is displayed like a wild animal in captivity, the braying triumphalism of the War Party marks a low point, not only in our conduct of the war, but in the annals of modern military history. I have every confidence, however, that we'll go much lower before the occupation is over."

Now, let me see if I understand this message. Shaving Saddam's dirty, tangled beard (he never HAD a beard, the symbol of Arab virility, in all the years he was Iraq's dictator) is not a routine act of sanitation and comfort. In the eyes of the anti-war pro-Saddam Left, it is "a cold, calculated act of sadism?" And, somehow, cleaning up Saddam after what must have been many weeks without a shave and a haircut, is treating him "like a wild animal in captivity?"

I rather imagine that the families of those 300,000 dead Iraqis in the mass graves probably ARE rejoicing at Saddam's capture. And, obviously, his capture has already led to new intelligence information that is leading to the financiers of terrorism in Iraq. Remember, when captured he had $750,000 American dollars, enough for a nice room at the Baghdad Sheraton.

WHY would giving Saddam a much needed bath, shampoo and shave be so upsetting to the "Anti-war" folks? I suspect it probably has something to do with money. The well-coordinated and timed "peace" marches around the world early this year were not brought about with play money. It takes LOTS of money to pull that off. And, according to the anti-war groups always exaggerated figures, faithfully reported by BBC on February 17, 2003, "Between six and 10 million people are thought to have marched in up to 60 countries over the weekend — the largest demonstrations of their kind since the Vietnam War."

According to the BBC, the biggest demonstration was in London, "with nearly two million taking part, organizers said, although police put the figure at 750,000."

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, told the crowd in Hyde Park:

"This war is solely about oil. George Bush has never given a damn about human rights.'"

On the same February week-end BBC reported "more than one million" demonstrators opposing George W. Bush in Baghdad." By September 2003, however, the "demonstrators" for Saddam were getting sparse. Paris' Le Monde noted:

"Now the American army must face demonstrations supporting Saddam Hussein. On Monday five hundred people holding up portraits of the former dictator marched in the north of the country."

Five hundred people? In eight months, the Baghdad "demonstrators" dropped from one million to 500 people? The BBC went on to report:

"Another similar demonstration was held several days ago in Baghdad's big neighborhood, Al-Adhamiya, a former Baathist ghetto. The public's hostility to Americans was flaunted along with appeals for Saddam Hussein's return. In Washington, George W. Bush is having trouble getting a supplementary budget of 87 billion dollars approved by Congress.

"… Five days ago in Baghdad's Al-Adhamiya neighborhood, hundreds of men insolently marched, weapons in hand, demanding Saddam Hussein's return! The scene took place Thursday September 25 without notice to the Iraqi or international press.

"The demonstrators were several hundred and a few thousand curious onlookers stood in the doorways. Some threw flowers. Children in the street remember it as a sort of holiday…"

And, here we are, Christmas week, with the media reporting a mere 100 demonstrators protesting the cruel and inhuman shave and haircut for Saddam and the $87 billion having been passed overwhelmingly in Congress. So, from January's 1 million demonstrators supporting Saddam Hussein, we now are supposed to worry about 100 demonstrators whining about Saddam being mistreated by having his beard shaved?

Yet, the Baathists are reduced to bribing kids to hold their signs, there is so little support for Saddam today. This nonsense has even begun to irritate the Iraqis. Mouyad Al-Adhami, who officiates at the Sunni mosque Abou Hanifa, and is the most respected imam in the community of Al-Adhamiya, said, in apparent exasperation to the Paris Le Monde,

"This demonstration was ridiculous. The demonstrators are essentially teenagers and children, paid by who knows who. I think the only point was to tease the Americans."

And, there you have it. In January 2003, Saddam Hussein warned, "US troops would be committing suicide if they tried to take Baghdad," because control of Iraq would be "determined by armies on the ground."

And, what happened? Saddam's army didn't fight, the American army DID fight, most Iraqis did NOT resist, and today the vast majority of the people in Iraq, 66% of them, don't want the Americans to leave. Because George W. Bush had the vision and the courage to DO something instead of cowering behind empty slogans about "peace," both America and Iraq can look forward to real peace between the two nations.

© Mary Mostert