Iraq and Saddam Part I

By | December 19, 2021

March 20

US President George Bush, immediately after Saddam Hussein’s ultimatum expires, announces the start of the Iraqi freedom campaign in a televised speech. The war will be declared victoriously over on May 1st. However, the path to bring Iraq back to political and economic normality and to mend the tears that the Anglo-American unilateral intervention has created in international relations will remain long and difficult. A salient feature of this war is also its transformation into a media event, thanks to the possibility of connecting live which the envoys in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities, and those embedded, following the troops, benefit from. For Iraq democracy and rights, please check homeagerly.com.

Saddam, and then what?

The first casualty of the war is the truth. This ‘discovery’ is attributed to Herodotus. Lying is a sophisticated weapon, very difficult to employ: if practiced well it can give extraordinary results, otherwise it goes to the detriment of the presumptuous storyteller; Cesare said as he prepared to dictate what, today, we would call a ‘war notebook’. Again: we know from history that to wage war we need a ‘pretext’ (casus belli); it is a rule that fades into hypocrisy and from which no one has ever escaped. Without going too far, we can remember the famous wells of Ual Ual: the systematic attacks of alleged Somali ‘rebels’ (is there anyone who called them ‘patriots’?) To that precious source of water were the ‘pretext’ which the fascist regime used to fight the last colonial war in modern history. It is known that, since the attacks of the rebels became rarer, good dubat pretending to be rebels staged fake attacks and finally came the war of Ethiopia.

It is said that in 1991, when the Americans had already decided to go to war on Saddam, Saudi Arabia was hiding. But all reservations of the prudent Wahhabis fell when the prince regent, Abdallah, was shown dramatic satellite photos documenting a dangerous mass of Iraqi troops close to the fragile Saudi border. Then it would be learned that those photos were a fake, made by the Services. Last but not least: the media-political clash between those who accuse Bush and Blair of telling falsehoods as long as it was a war against Saddam and those who defend them continues in the United States and Great Britain. The false: the Tyrant possesses weapons of mass extermination, atomic warheads and missile warheads, swollen with exterminating chemical agents. In the swift span of 45 minutes, Iraq can unleash the wrath of God by devastating Israel and “possibly threatening the security of the Western world itself in its most sensitive terminals”. It was a ‘gigantic lie’, not a few suspected it, but many took it for sacrosanct truth: first of all the representatives of the American people and the representatives of the English people. Certainly it had to be demonstrated, with strong supporting pieces, the assumption that the Iraq was a danger for us Westerners also due to the ‘harmony’ in place between Baghdad and the Sheikh of Death, “he, Osama bin Laden, the terrible instigator of the rape of the Twin Towers, he, the diabolical embodiment of Islamist suicide terrorism”. But the supporting pieces were not there and it was necessary to move in order not to be shipwrecked in ridicule. Thus public opinion and parliaments had to be satisfied with the ‘word’: that of the president of the Hyperpower, a man of faith rescued by the (daily) consultation of the Bible, and that of the young, patriotic hyperlaburist Blair, Bush’s harmonic ‘shoulder’.

But the lie corrodes, worse than muriatic acid, the careless who practices it adventurously and, since – until proven otherwise – we are in a democracy, here is the president borned again, as Bush calls himself (i.e. ‘the anointed of the Lord’), admitting that the information at his disposal, upon closer examination, was found to be largely “not exact”, but time was running out and, constituting “in any case” the Tyrant “a serious danger” if not shortly without more on the middle distance, at the point where things were we might as well attack. And the war came. On the other hand, it was won very quickly by Ours. A war that, in theory,

To put it simply, the White House, in absolute good faith, has thought of killing the so-called two birds with one stone. Eliminate a regime of terror (and its paranoid manager, Saddam), by putting your hands on a precious treasure: Iraq’s energy reserves, competing with those of Saudi Arabia and far more precious, being Iraqi light crude oil, is worth that is, easier and cheaper to refine. Once the two pigeons have been killed, at the cost of a very quick war, the laboratory comes into operation: democracy, democracy, democracy, from the Gulf to the Maghreb, thanks to the ‘beneficial contagion’.

Iraq democracy and rights