SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: GST who wrote (111237)8/13/2003 7:58:45 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
March 19, 2003
Elie Wiesel supports Bush.
Thanks to Aaron the Rantblogger for the heads-up. This got surprisingly little play after it was published in the Lost Angeles Times last Tuesday, less play than intellectual marshmallow Martin Sheen’s self-pityfest got. Me, I’ll take Elie Wiesel’s opinion over Martin Sheen’s any day.
I’m reprinting the entire piece here since to get it off the LA Times site you have to “register,” which I hate doing. As a result the data miners at the LA Times now think Wilhelmina Frogsucker, 100-year old resident of Baghdad, Wyoming, zip code 82222 who makes less than $25,000 a year is a new registrant. If you can be more creative in screwing up their ill-gotten stats go ahead.

I won't italicize the whole thing, but Wiesel wrote it, not me:

“Peace Isn't Possible in Evil's Face”

Rational people must intervene against the likes of Hussein.

By Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace laureate.

Under normal circumstances, I might have joined those peace marchers who, here and abroad, staged public demonstrations against an invasion of Iraq. After all, I have seen enough of the brutality, the ugliness, of war to oppose it heart and soul. Isn’t war forever cruel, the ultimate form of violence? It inevitably generates not only loss of innocence but endless sorrow and mourning. How could one not reject it as an option?

And yet, this time I support President Bush’s policy of intervention to eradicate international terrorism, which, most civilized nations agree, is the greatest threat facing us today. Bush has placed the Iraqi war into that context; Saddam Hussein is the ruthless leader of a rogue state to be disarmed by whatever means is necessary if he does not comply fully with the United Nations’ mandates to disarm. If we fail to do this, we expose ourselves to terrifying consequences.

In other words: Though I oppose war, I am in favor of intervention when, as in this case because of Hussein’s equivocations and procrastinations, no other option remains.

The recent past shows that only military intervention stopped bloodshed in the Balkans and destroyed the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Moreover, had the international community intervened in Rwanda, more than 800,000 men, women and children would not have perished there.

Had Europe’s great powers intervened against Adolf Hitler’s aggressive ambitions in 1938 instead of appeasing him in Munich, humanity would have been spared the unprecedented horrors of World War II.

Does this apply to the present situation in Iraq? It does. Hussein must be stopped and disarmed. Even our European allies who oppose us now agree in principle, though they insist on waiting.

But time always plays in dictators’ favor. Having managed to hide his biological weapons, Hussein’s goal is to be able to choose the time and the place for using them. Surely that is why he threw out the U.N. inspectors four years ago. If he now appears to offer episodic minor concessions, just as surely that is because American troops are massing at his borders.

In certain political circles, one hears demands for proof that Hussein is still in possession of forbidden weapons. Some European governments evidently do not believe Secretary of State Colin L. Powell’s statement that Hussein has such weapons, but I do, and here is why:

Powell is a great soldier and one who does not like war. It was he who prevailed upon then-President Bush in 1991 not to enter Baghdad. It was he who advised the current president not to bypass the U.N. system. If he says that he has proof of Hussein’s criminal disregard of the U.N. resolutions, I believe him. I believe that a man of his standing would not jeopardize his name, his career, his prestige, his past and his honor.

We have known for a long time that the Iraqi ruler is a mass murderer. In the late 1980s, he ordered tens of thousands of his own citizens gassed to death. In 1990, he invaded Kuwait. After his defeat, he set its oil fields on fire, thus causing the worst ecological disaster in history. He also launched Scud missiles on Israel, which was not a participant in that war. He should have been indicted then for crimes against humanity. Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic was arrested and brought to trial for less.

Add to the evidence against him Hussein’s conversation with CBS anchor Dan Rather. Listening to him declaring that Iraq was not defeated in 1991 made one wonder about his sanity; he appears to live a world of fantasy and hallucination.

The nightmarish question of what such a man might do with his arsenal of unconventional weaponry is why, more than ever, some of us believe in intervention. We must deal sooner rather than later with this madman whose possession of weapons of mass destruction threatens to provoke an ever-widening conflagration.

What it comes down to is this: We have a moral obligation to intervene where evil is in control. Today, that place is Iraq.

clubbeaux.com



To: GST who wrote (111237)8/13/2003 8:09:42 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Havel endorses U.S. line on Iraq
Bruce I. Konviser, The Washington Times


PRAGUE--Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is a menace to his neighbors and pre-emptive military action may be warranted against him, Czech President Vaclav Havel said in an interview ahead of a visit to Washington beginning today.

"Saddam Hussein's regime poses a major threat to many nations and to his own people," Mr. Havel said. "The right thing for Bush is not to go in alone. There should be an international intervention."

The visit, which includes a meeting with Mr. Bush tomorrow and talks with leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives, will be Mr. Havel's final one to Washington before his scheduled retirement in January.

But in an interview late last week, the one-time dissident playwright expressed more interest in current issues than in nostalgic memories of 13 years as Czech president.

The Bush administration doctrine of pre-emptive military action could be justified on a case-by-case basis, said the often-ailing Mr. Havel, who turns 66 next month.

He said World War II might have been avoided had Western powers--Britain and France, in particular--not pursued a policy of appeasement with Adolf Hitler.

One of Mr. Havel's last official acts will be to preside over a NATO summit in the Czech capital in November that is expected to sharply change the alliance. Meeting for the first time in a former Warsaw Pact territory, delegates will invite as many as seven more countries to join the alliance.

Mr. Havel said NATO enlargement is critical to stabilizing Eastern Europe and would lay to rest an ugly chapter of European history.

"It will finally show there are no more spheres of influence," he said.

His life-long struggle for human rights--he spent five years as a political prisoner under the communist regime--has won him praise and friendship from world figures such as former President Bill Clinton and Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel.

But despite having joined NATO in 1999--along with Poland and Hungary--and the prospect of joining the European Union, possibly as early as 2004, the post-communist years have been difficult ones for Mr. Havel and his country.

He has waged a long battle against powerful political forces that scoff at the notion of civil society being a necessary component for a vibrant democracy even as they advocate what Mr. Havel has called mafia capitalism.

Now, the man who led the Velvet Revolution in 1989, which brought about the bloodless overthrow of the communist regime, says he wants a break.

"I would like to withdraw from public view for a certain amount of time, to read and write," Mr. Havel said. He declined to say whether he wants to do a memoir, a play or something else.

He intends to remain an active voice on the political scene. But he said power is overrated and he has no plans to hold office again.

"I can't find much empathy for those who yearn for power," he said. "I never aspired to it but it came to me, and has been a very interesting experience."

Jan Urban, a fellow dissident during the communist days and now a commentator for Czech Radio, hasn't always seen eye to eye with the president, but he said Mr. Havel has come full circle.

"He finishes exactly as he started," Mr. Urban said, "as a moral authority hated by a large part of the political class but admired by a large part of the population."



meaus.com