A Shame He Can Only Hang Once

If anyone in the former Iraqi regime deserves to hang, it is certainly Ali Hassan al-Majid. If there is a reason the UN never found weapons of mass destruction, it is because Chemical Ali used them all up.

He is responsible for the deaths of 180,000 Kurds, just in 1988. The effects of the chemical weapons used continue to affect certain areas of Kurdistan. There are higher rates of birth defects and cancer where the use of the weapons was most intense.

Thousands of villages were razed and burned. Majid openly admitted during his trial that he ordered troops to execute all Kurds who ignored the orders to leave their villages.

When people suggest things were so much better under Saddam, they do it with very short memories.

Bush, Britain, and Values Clarification

I was at a social event recently and everything was going along swimmingly until someone said to me, “Do you like George Bush?” I realised at the time this was meant to be phrased, “Of course you don’t like George Bush, do you?” Nonetheless, I said, “Yes, I suppose so.”

If there is anything that a random gathering of British people do not want to hear, it is that someone might, in some way, or for any reason, support Bush. The only other whole sentence I managed to utter was, “Just like any other President, his administration has policies with which I agree and those with which I disagree.” Otherwise, any time I started to get more than one word out, I was shouted down.

When someone said, “What about the war in Iraq?” I said, “What about it?” When they said, “Where were the weapons of mass destruction?” I didn’t get a chance to say, “I suppose they all got used up on the Iranians and Kurds.” After all, there was no question that Saddam had used them in the past. Not that I care about WMD or their role in the overthrown of Saddam’s regime.

After all, if after the swift war victory, all sides had said, “Thank you very much. We’ll set up a civilised government from here,” it would have been hailed a success and no one would have cared whether or not there were WMD. It would have been like war is supposed to be – superior armies fly over and subdue the enemy with precision bombing, then armies walk in. If there are any casualties, they do not happen to us.

It’s not that I would have been any less attacked or ostracised for supporting Bush. He is a Republican and talks openly about God. He isn’t slick as Clinton, nor does he share the same personal values. Brits still presume to know better about the American presidency than Americans.

When it come to American presidential politics, the only thing I pay attention to less than Brits is opinion polls and their approval ratings. After all, whether it’s a 88% approval or 28% approval or 7% disapproval or 66% disapproval, it’s still the same president. It’s the people who are changeable.

Throughout four or eight years, the course of human events brings what it may. Some things are handled better than others. Throughout it all, an administration represents certain values and principles. In this sense, perhaps Brits have a better vantage point. The repugnance with which they treat Bush has little to do with day-to-day policy decisions. Britain also represents certain values and principles which have little in common with Bush or most people in the red states that elected him.

If in terms of values I have to choose between Bush and Britain, I have to go with Bush every time.

Killing in Iraq

Someone else’s bad news may be good news. I came across a liberal blog that was complaining that Congressional Democrats have withdrawn legislation to require abortifacients to be stocked on all military bases. Foeticide activists are outraged.

“The situation is unconscionable,” says Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation (NAF). “If you are a military woman in Iraq, and you are raped, it is this country’s obligation to make sure you have access to emergency contraception.” Something tells me that Saporta would feel the same way if you are a military woman in Iraq and can’t keep your legs closed. After all, you wouldn’t be surprised to know that the NAF favours the absolute right to abortion on demand.

Saporta is concerned about this because a survey paid for by the US Defense Department found that almost a third of military women reported being the victim of rape or attempted rape during their tenure in the military. Of course this raises two issues that she doesn’t address – why aren’t a third of male soldiers being charged with rape or attempted rape and what are women doing in a war zone? Resolving the latter might solve some of the problem – forget the silliness that women belong in combat situations with men.

But back to the main issue. Cases of pregnancy from rape are very rare. Nonetheless, this is always dragged out as an excuse for protecting foeticidal rights. It’s emotive, but philosophically useless. One crime is unrelated to the other. If every new life is uniquely its own, the circumstances under which it was created are irrelevant.

I suppose the NAF can’t make an strong a case if they say men and women living together in close proximity, in an emotionally charged atmosphere is asking for at least the same level of fornication as you get in civillian society. They don’t want to say that if we are going to pander to those who can keep their pants on outside the service, then we should at least equally provide for them in the service.

I just have to mention one other thing about the NAF. Their website has lots of information on how to stop Crisis Pregnancy Centers.  Instead, the NAF has a toll-free hotline which “offers women unbiased, factual information about pregnancy and abortion in English, Spanish and French.” Did I mention that the NAF is, openly and by its own admission, a professional association of abortion providers. Surely they have no vested interested in shutting down CPCs and anything they tell you about abortion (except about the wads of cash they are stuffing into their pockets and what they do with the chopped up little bodies) is trustworthy.

A Father’s Love

By and large, or at least stereotypically, Kurds are moderate Muslims. It’s easy to look at it that way when Shi’ites and Arab Sunnis are blowing each other up constantly in Iraq.

Kurds are not westerners and they are not Christians. Culturally many of them, even after moving to the West, retain certain traditional family values. One of these values is that if your daughter or niece is dating the wrong person, she needs to be murdered.

Sure you can beat her constantly for two weeks, but if she still loves a fellow Kurd who is from the wrong region, you have to strangle her with a bootlace, strip her naked, cram her into a suitcase and dump her below a pile of bin bags, a rusting fridge and a discarded television in a back garden in Birmingham. What father would want anything different for his daughter?

Most British newspapers, including the Daily Telegraph, have the full story.

And they say all cultures are equal.

Under Fire

The Turks are at it again. There aren’t that many Armenians left, so the Turks have to hate the Kurds. They especially hate that the Kurds want to be united and independent. The Kurds would undoubtedly want the bit of southeastern Turkey where 55% of their number live.

But just as most of what the Turks occupy is historically Greek, likewise the Kurdish parts of Turkey were Kurdish for hundreds or even thousands of years before the Turks ever showed up.

The Turks have been building up their forces on the border with Iraq since before the Coalition invasion. The building has been increasing in recent months.  Because of the relative freedom of Kurds in northern Iraq, Turkish ruled Kurds frequently cross the border and set up strikes against Turkish force. Now Turkish troops are crossing into Iraq to pursue them. They are also shelling Kurdish positions in Iraq.

But violating Iraqi borders, the Turks can claim no moral high ground. They cannot complain about the Kurds crossing the border if they are doing the same thing. Why do the Turks have a greater claim to the Kurdish parts of Anatolia than the Kurds of Iraq have over their territory?

Mob Rule

Sometime you have to wonder why we send young men into danger to help people. As reported in the Daily Telegraph:

A cheering mob made victory hand signals yesterday after a British serviceman was killed in an ambush on the streets of Basra.

The Ministry of Defence said the soldier was removed from Al Tuwaysa, central Basra, but died of his wounds later in hospital.

A civilian driver in the convoy was killed at the scene of the ambush. The mob danced as his body was dragged from a burning fuel lorry.

This is further evidence that all cultures are not equal.

The attackers were members of the Mahdi army, the militia of the evil Moqtada al-Sadr. And before any of you anti-war types think that the Mahdi army are just trying to free Iraq from the imperialist west, realise they send out death squads to cleanse the area of Sunni Muslims.

The only answer is to exterminate the Mahdi army and Moqtada al-Sadr.

Putting a Foot Wrong

Nancy Pelosi is a true Isaiah 3:12 woman.

When even the Washington Post thinks a liberal has screwed up, you know they’ve put their foot in it. If Nancy would go back to the kitchen Congress where she belongs, everyone could do the job they are supposed to do.

And if there’s one thing I like to see, it’s a feminist in a headscarf.

Usurper

Is Nancy Pelosi somehow under the mistaken impression that somebody elected her President? I thought those sorts of delusions were reserved for Hilary Clinton after the 1992 election.

Congressional delegations going on junkets is nothing new. Members of relevant committees travel to places to look into situations relevant to their remit. Pelosi is on a mission to undermine US foreign policy. She is going against the express wishes of the branch of government entrusted with matters of foreign policy, namely the Executive.

As the BBC’s correspondent in Washington has noted, Pelosi’s second trip to the Middle East this year shows she has no intention of letting President Bush dominate foreign policy. But that’s his job. Like or not, that is the role of the President. It’s not hers to let or not let. This just goes to show once again that the Democrats have no respect for the Constitution.

The President withdrew the ambassador to Damascus, so Pelosi is going to talk to officials in an official capacity that President specifically does not want to to do. As the White House spokesperson said, “This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the Siniora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow into Iraq from its borders.” But Nancy knows best. It’s always better to treat with terrorists if you think it will gain political points at home by undermining the authority of the President.

Lies and Paper Tigers

Iran is continuing to reneg on promises to release Leading Seaman Faye Turney, even after the second letter written under duress. It is so full of mistakes even about British government that it could not have been anything other than a dictated piece.  The British Government rightly dismissed it. I don’t often use the terms “British Government” and “rightly” in the same sentence.

The Iranians seem to want to play hardballs. Frankly, if they have the balls to do it, they have entirely misplaced testicular fortitude. If it came to an out and out military confrontation, the Iranians would crumple. Muslim armies may have marched across the world in the 8th century. They may have done it again under Temur in the 13th and 14th. But this is not the Middle Ages.

Let’s look at it this way. The Iranians fought their much smaller neighbour Iraq for almost the entirety of the 1980s and they never came close to winning. These are the same Iraqis that were defeated in 100 hours in the first Gulf War and again in a matter of days in the second Gulf War.

There are two aircraft carriers in the Gulf just waiting for something to do. I can think of little better for them than a little dogfighting (if the Iranians can get their planes into the air) and a little target practice. There’s nothing like a few Iranian fish in a barrel. The Iranians will resort to the same thing as the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan – hit and run (or hit and suicide bomb) terrorism.

 That’s the only play in their book. They know that they can’t actually stand up against the West and that just pisses them off more. That’s why they kidnap women, shamefully force Muslim attire on them, and dictate nonsenisical letters to them. That’s why they unashamedly lie to British officials and make silly demands.

For all their bluster, that’s all they’ve got. The emperor – or in this case the Ayatollah – has no clothes, not even from his navel to his knees.

Compassion Redefined

As much as I hate to disappoint my loyal readership, my posting may be sporadic during the Easter holidays.

The Iranian kidnapping of British sailors continues to dominate the news. As more and more facts come it, it has become more and more indesputable that the British sailors were in Iraqi waters. The Iranians even as much as admitted it by giving their own coordinates, which proved they were in Iraqi waters. When caught out the Iranians changed their tune and came up with another set.

The Iranians knew exactly what they were doing. Every government run by people of sane mind (that’s pretty much every government apart from Iran) needs to demand the release of the hostages. The Iranians have acted in the most despicable, dishourable way.

This includes the way that they have used Leading Seaman Faye Turney. Even though the Qur’an says there shall be no compulsion on matters of religion, Seaman Turney has been photographed wearing a scarf over her head in stark contrast to her military uniform. As least their view of women means that she is likely to get released first.

According to the first apology she penned at gunpoint, “The people are friendly and hospitable, very compassionate and warm. Please don’t worry about me, I am staying strong. Hopefully it won’t be long until I am home to get ready for Molly’s birthday party with a present from the Iranian people,” Isn’t that lovely. How sweet. The people who kidnapped me warm and friendly. They’re compassionately holding me hostage, but when they let me go, they going to give my daughter a present.

The Iranians weren’t letting her go until she wrote another apology urging the British Government to withdraw the troops from Iraq.  Now maybe after two apologies, the compassionate kidnappers will let her go. We’ll have to see.

Withholding Judgment

The BBC programme Question Time held a special edition to mark the fourth anniversary of the Iraq invasion. Even though the audience was weighted toward those who oppose the present military situation, some of whom may have even opposed the war at the time, the other side really made the more cogent arguments.

Some of the more sane comments came from former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. She repeatedly encouraged people to stop arguing about whether Iraq should have been invaded. History is history. She focused on the future and how historians will eventually view those events that are current to us. She perceptively noted, “If the Iraqis are able to institutionalise democracy it will be called a success. It is still too early to call.”