Editorial: The March To Save Saddam
By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 17, 2003
Millions of people poured into the streets of cities from Melbourne to New York on Saturday February 15 to
protect Saddam Hussein from an imminent American attempt to disarm and dethrone him and disable his
arsenal of chemical, biological and proto-nuclear weapons. They professed concern about Iraqi children
(bearing mock bodies to symbolize their alarm) but marched in solidarity with Palestinians and Arabs who kill
their own children by strapping bombs to them and telling them to blow up other children -- Jew children --
so that they will go to heaven and their families will receive a $25,000 reward.
In politics intentions count for nothing; actions are what matter. If the marchers are successful, Saddam will
survive to be stronger than ever. All over the Middle East and the Muslim world fanatical haters of
Americans, Christians and Jews will take heart from Saddam's successful defiance, will draw the conclusion
that the West is weak, and will be inspired to commit new atrocities against its most defenceless citizens.
All the marches were organized by supporters of Communist and other totalitarianisms, and by the fifth
column agents of Islamo-fascism. All the demonstrations promoted Iraqi war propaganda -- myths about
starving children and about alleged mercernary interests behind American policy; all of them had one
purpose -- to disarm the American force already in the Middle East and allow Saddam to fight another day.
It is true that some of the marchers were well-intentioned or at least not so blind yet that they could look
past the evil that is the regime in Iraq. What of it? What could be more irrelevant than splitting critical hairs
when your country is under attack and your actions serve the aggressors?
During the Cold War there were many intelligent souls on the left who joined the "peace" demonstrations in
the West organized by Communists and their supporters, but described themselves as
"anti-anti-Communists." They meant by this that they knew that Communism was bad, but were against the
cold warriors who were locked in mortal combat with the Soviet empire. The Gorbachev regime in their eyes
was bad, but Ronald Reagan was a "warmonger" and therefore worse.
The anti-anti-Communists may have been good at stimulating critical discussion. A democracy can always
benefit from dissenters because no faction has a monopoly on truth. But in practice the decent opponents of
Cold War encouraged the Communists to hold onto their slave empire and resist the presures of the free
world. In the end it was Ronald Reagan and the Cold Warriors he led who stymied the Communists'
ambitions, brought down the Soviet empire and liberated more than a billion people. In the scales of that
historic struggle, when it came to mobilizing the military resources that backed the enemy down, the
anti-anti-Communists ultimately put their weight on the other side of the scale.
During the Vietnam War -- the clearest parallel to the present events -- the anti-war movement was
organized by Communists who wanted the other side to win. The non-Communists who joined their marches,
whatever their intentions, served the same practical end. America was divided at home and these divisons
evnetually forced its armies to retreat from the field of battle. As a result, the Communists won and
proceeded to slaughter two-and-a-half million peasants in Indo-China between 1975 and 1978. This is the
scenario that the people (mostly the same people) who are leading Saturday's protests hope to accomplish:
the defeat of the West and the triumph of Islamo-fascism and its friends.
Today's "peace" movement -- the innocent-intentioned along with the malevolent rest -- is a fifth column
army in our midst working for the other side. Already their leaders have warned that if the United States
remains determined to oppose this totalitarian evil and stay its intended course, they will act within our
borders to "disrupt the flow of normal life" and sabotage the war. This is ultimately the most ominous threat
Americans face. Abroad we can conquer any foe. The real danger lies at home.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Horowitz is the author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son, which has been
described as ?the first great autobiography of his generation,? and which chronicles his odyssey from
radical activism to the current positions he holds. Among his other books are The Politics of Bad Faith and
The Art of Political War. The Art of Political War was described by White House political strategist Karl
Rove as ?the perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield.? Horowitz?s latest book, Uncivil Wars, was
published in January this year, and chronicles his crusade against intolerance and racial McCarthyism on
college campuses last spring. Click here to read more about David |
