BCT Editorial – 1/3/07

This page was last updated on January 3, 2007.

Death of a tyrant; Editorial; Beaver County Times; January 3, 2007.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Saddam Hussein’s execution does not change things in Iraq

“Saddam Hussein’s death changes nothing.”

[RWC] No, of course not.

“The Iraqi tyrant was hanged on Saturday, and no one should mourn his passing or even question the justice of his execution. Saddam led a violent life and was responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people. He deserved to die for his crimes.

“But as far as stabilizing the situation in Iraq so it can become a bastion of democracy in the Middle East or speeding the exit of U.S. forces from the country, his death means nothing because Saddam Hussein’s Iraq no longer exists. His death revenges the past. That’s all.

“What his death will not do is start the healing process in Iraq. That country was, is and will be driven by religious and ethnic divisions - Sunni vs. Shiite and Arab vs. Kurd. The divisions are deep and historic.

“Using brute strength, raw power and terror, Saddam’s Arab Sunni minority was able to dominate the Kurds, an ethnic Sunni minority, and the Shiites, a religious majority. His rule exacerbated the divisions. Kurds and Shiites suffered terribly under Saddam, and the wounds are recent, open and deep.”

[RWC] How can that be? Haven’t liberals been speaking like Iraq was an idyllic land full of kids flying kites in flower-covered meadows?

“The U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam unleashed the Kurds and the Shiites. After decades of oppression, they are bent of settling scores and gaining power. They are being opposed by Sunni Arabs who fear retaliation and their loss of power.”

[RWC] While the Shiites and Sunnis have been going at each other, violence in the Kurdish areas is much lower. Though there surely are exceptions, in general the Kurds appear more interested in moving forward than in exacting revenge.

“As a result, Iraq has become a Hobbesian land where the ‘condition of man ... is a condition of war of everyone against everyone.’”

[RWC] Yes, Iraq was so peaceful before we attacked. The wars started by Saddam Hussein and the mass murder of his fellow citizens were a figment of our imagination.

“Because of the blundering of the Bush administration, U.S. military forces are caught in the middle of this mess. Because of the bungling of the post-invasion plans by the Bush administration, our soldiers and Marines are viewed as occupiers, not liberators, by many Iraqis. Because of the hubris of President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others, a first-class military is being ground down.”

[RWC] Ah, it’s not a real Iraq editorial without the obligatory “ground down” or something similar. This is at least the 11^th time a Times editorial has referred to our military as being “ground up,” “ground down,” et cetera. These claims go back at least to April 2004, after only about a year in Iraq.

“On the same weekend Saddam was executed, two soldiers were killed, pushing the death toll in the 46-month-old conflict to at least 3,000. Each one of their lives was worth more than Saddam in life and in death.”