Replies

Ignoring for a moment the arguments for/against military action against Iraq and the US role in this issue, a few observations on the Iraqi letter to the SC.

First off, Iraq is not an Islamic state, but yet, we see all sorts of references to Islam in this rambling tome. Opening salutation and closing salutation are both Islamic quotes--and they threaten the wrath of God. Can you imagine the sputtering ire of the “world” if the United States inserted threatening Christian text into official communications with the UN? My goodness, there would be no end to the wailing and caterwauling. But yet, nothing heard from the permanently aggrieved/anti-sanctions/pro-Iraq crowd on this subject.

Second, Israel has nothing to do with the discussions and the proposed inspection, but yet Iraq drags Israel into the fray in an obvious attempt to split the world and rally Muslims. This doesn't speak well about the intelligence of the average Muslim if they can't see past this smokescreen. It is a fact that Iraq is trying to introduce Israel into this mess as if the US is working with Israel on this matter. This is a blatant attempt to turn this issue into one where the Muslim’s of the world stand on one side, and the US and Israel stand on the other, and the world has yet to challenge Iraq on this nonsense.

Third, if I were Iraq, I would not lie boldly in the opening statement, as this immediately impeaches any further statements or arguments. You see, Iraq writes, "Then they returned to stress that Iraq had in fact produced chemical and biological weapons. They both know, as well as we do, and so can other countries, that such fabrications are baseless.”

Now, we know that Iraq HAD chemical and bio weapons, and moreover, Saddam used them. In fact, even the most ardent defenders of Iraq and the anti-sanctions crowd know this to be a fact. Indeed, the US gets beat-up all the time for allegedly providing Iraq with “chemical weapons.” I stand by to hear the angry voices from the left as they point out that Iraq has lied shamelessly to their face. . .I mean, they scream all the time about US “lies,” therefore, because they are such honest folk, I am sure they will be just as outraged over Iraq’s lie. I stand by to hear the protestations (*crickets*).

Oh, later in the letter Iraq says, ". . .Iraq had not developed weapons of mass destruction, during their absence since 1998." Now, take a close look at that statement. It leaves the door open that Iraq HAD developed WMD before 1998. If they had never developed WMD, as they allege, there is no need to include the year. They should have said, "Iraq had not developed weapons of mass destruction"--period. I see Iraqi trying to play games.

Fourth, Iraq says, “But we will not forget, nor should others do, that safeguarding our people’s dignity, security, independence, and protecting our country, its sovereignty and sublime values, is as a sacred duty in our leadership’s and government‘s agenda.”

I am sure Kuwait is pleased to read these words.

Finally, when it comes to spelling “Arab” and/or Muslim names, we know they may be spelled any number of ways. However, western names usually have one spelling, and spelling the names of famous people is easy, just look them up. Therefore, it is a deliberate slight on the part of the Iraqi’s when they spell Colin Powell’s name, “Collin?”

Again, overlooking the over-arching debate of the issue, the letter does highlight the fact that the professional “anti’s” of the world are giving a pass to Iraq for many things they would never allow the US to get away with--like lying about the use of chemical weapons.

I suppose we should think this is great, in a way, as if “we,” the western world, are that much more mature than the rest of the world, so any lies on the part of Iraq should be ignored, poor things, they just don’t know any better. This attitude smacks of ethnocentric bias and is patronizing to Iraq and the rest of the world.

Finally, we all know Islam is a religion of peace so any inclusion of Islamic verse (used as threats) in official documents is understandable and a legitimate expression of faith and should be tolerated.