Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Celebrities Should DO Their Homework on Iraq
DefenseWatch ^ | 1-8-2003 | Tom Knowlton

Posted on 01/08/2003 12:46:56 PM PST by Conservative News Hound

January 8, 2003 11:36

Celebrities Should Do Their Homework on Iraq

By Tom Knowlton

The hottest selling gift in Hollywood the past holiday season must have been T-shirts reading, "I am not a politician, but I play one on TV."

For starters, it seems almost impossible to turn on the television and not come across an Arab apologist, misinformed media pundit, or - for some inexplicable reason, Hollywood celebrity - claiming that American action against Iraq is "all about oil."

The most prolific talking heads spreading this misinformation are actors Martin Sheen, Tim Robbins, and Susan Sarandon, who during an October 2002 antiwar rally in New York City characterized the proposed military action in Iraq as a "war for oil."

However, I have yet to hear any of these "war for oil" accusers even attempt to explain why we did not take the oil in March of 1991. With the Iraqi military in complete disarray, U.S. forces were in control of Kuwait and were one quick tank thrust away from Baghdad and the world's second largest oil reserve.

It seems highly implausible to the rational mind that the United States would expend $80 billion dollars in 1991, but put off plans of making a run for the oil for more than a decade.

Moreover, a U.S.-Iraqi war in 2003 would likely result in a spike in oil prices akin to the over $40-per-barrel prices we experienced in 1991. Even a short-term rise in oil prices would trim corporate benefits, stymie economic growth and further hobble the airline and shipping industry. This is not exactly the recipe for economic imperialism that the Hollywood jet set are making the impending war out to be.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that the cost of a war with Iraq would amount to approximately $9-13 billion to initially deploy our forces, another $6-9 billion per month to fight the war, $5-7 billion to return our forces home, and $1-4 billion per month to temporarily occupy Iraq.

Those figures do not take into account the escalated costs that would be incurred if Saddam were to employ chemical and/or biological weapons, or if U.S. forces become involved in protracted urban warfare. Neither does it take into account the cost of rebuilding damage to the Iraqi infrastructure.

The CBO points out that Iraq's approximately daily production rate of 2.8 million barrels is near the country's peak sustainable production. Moreover, nearly 80 percent of Iraq's oil production is used to purchase imports under the United Nations Oil for Food Program or for domestic consumption. The only realistic margin for profit growth would come from the estimated 400,000 barrels per day that Saddam Hussein allegedly has smuggled out of Iraq to fund purchases in violation of United Nations sanctions. Legitimizing that production would only amount to approximately $3 billion in revenues per year.

So, even the ill-informed but opinionated "Hollywood elite" must recognize the implausibility of a "war for oil" scenario.

Second, in December 2002, former "M*A*S*H" star Mike Farrell organized 100 Hollywood personas into a group called Artists United to Win Without War. The group sent a letter to President Bush wherein all 100 signatories agreed that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction, but also warned that "war talk in Washington is alarming and unnecessary."

While I applaud the Artists United to Win Without War's recognition of that fact that it is a dangerous state of affairs for Saddam Hussein to possess weapons of mass destruction, the group failed to offer a viable alternative solution to military action aimed at toppling the Iraqi regime. Its apparent reliance upon the success and efficiency of United Nations weapons inspections shows an utter lack of comprehension at the history of failure this process has experienced since the close of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Charles Duefler, who served as the deputy executive chairman of UNSCOM from 1993 to 2000, admits that the premise of weapons inspections was that "Iraq would value the ability to export oil and engage in normal commerce more than it valued weapons of mass destruction capability - an assumption that turned out to be dead wrong. Discussions with senior Iraqi officials eventually revealed the enormous importance the regime attached to these weapons."

"Nothing in the U.N. resolutions changed that judgment by Iraq," Duelfer added. "If anything, the lesson Baghdad learned from the Gulf War is that such weapons - especially nuclear weapons - are even more important than they had thought. Senior Iraqis privately acknowledged that it had been a mistake to invade Kuwait before successfully building a nuclear weapon. They are convinced the outcome of the war would have been radically different if Washington had had to consider an Iraqi nuclear capability."

Saddam has not only continued to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but has shown little reservation about employing them against soldiers and civilians alike. In 1988, Iraq launched deadly poison gas attacks against both the Iranian military on the al Fao Peninsula and the Kurdish town of Halabja (that claimed over 5,000 civilian lives).

Saddam and the ruling Ba'ath party have enforced their iron-fisted rule through assassination, kidnapping, torture and murder. Mass executions are regularly carried out during Iraqi "prison cleansings," and the Iraqi military has conducted genocidal campaigns against the al-Dulaym tribe in 1995 and marsh Arabs in 1997. The 1988 Anfal campaign in northern Iraq alone resulted in the massacre of over 100,000 Kurds.

International authorities have suspected Saddam's agents are behind the assassination of several Iraqi dissidents in Europe and Asia, as well as the attempted assassination of former President George H.W. Bush in Kuwait in 1993.

The Artists United to Win Without War group fails to realistically understand that Saddam Hussein has achieved and maintained power solely through brute force. Saddam's total disregard for international law and national sovereignty is clearly evidenced by his 1990 invasion of Kuwait and ill-fated attempt to conquer areas of Iran a decade earlier. Moreover, he has repeatedly and consistently violated the terms of the U.N. resolutions that he agreed to in ending the 1991 Gulf War. While sanctions and embargos will bring greater hardship on the people of Iraq, they will never effectively alter the course of the Iraqi tyrant's ruling elite.

Third, the most vocal and visible celebrity to challenge the legitimacy of a war against Iraq is actor Sean Penn. Penn, who took out a $56,000 advertisement in The Washington Post in October 2002 denouncing the Bush administration's handling of Iraq, visited Iraq two months later to assess firsthand the situation. The visit was organized by the Institute of Public Accuracy, a U.S. group of policy analysts.

However, what was noticeably omitted from Penn's itinerary was a visit to Iraq's prisoner of war camps.

While the thought of keeping hostages for decades seems almost inconceivable to Americans, Iraq has a history of doing exactly that.

In April 1998, Iraq released an Iranian pilot, Hossein Lashgari, whose plane had been shot down in southern Iraq on Sept. 18, 1980 during the Iran-Iraq war. Although the Iran-Iraq War ended almost 15 years ago, several thousand Iranian prisoners of war are still held captive in Iraq. Likewise, over 600 Kuwaiti prisoners of war are still missing and believed held in Iraq over a decade after the close of the Gulf War in 1991.

Several political psychologists have attributed this horrific practice to Saddam Hussein's propensity for collecting "trophies."

During Penn's "factfinding" mission to Iraq, he failed to even broach the topic of missing U.S. Navy pilot Capt. Michael Scott Speicher, during his conversations with highly level Iraqi officials including Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz.

Speicher's F/A-18 Hornet was brought down over western Iraq during a mission on the first night of the U.S. air campaign on Jan. 17, 1991. He remains the only U.S. serviceman lost over land whose status remains in dispute.

An Iraqi defector claimed in 1999 that during the Gulf War he was ordered to pick up a U.S. pilot captured by villagers in western-central Iraq and turn him over to military authorities in Baghdad. The defector stated that the pilot was unhurt, and he identified Speicher's picture from a lineup of photos and passed several lie detector tests on the matter.

On Jan. 11, 2001 the Navy changed Speicher's status from "Killed In Action - Body Not Recovered" to "Missing In Action."

In March 2001, an unclassified summary of the "Intelligence Community Assessment of the Lieutenant Commander Speicher Case" produced at the request of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence indicated that a preponderance of the evidence pointed not only to that fact that Speicher survived the downing of his plane, but that he was captured alive by Iraq.

While Sean Penn lounged in the posh Al-Rashid Hotel as a guest of the Iraqi regime, Capt. Speicher and several thousand Kuwaiti and Iranian "trophies" spent yet another night in decidedly less comfort.

Our celebrities need to realize that there is more to world events than what makes it into the scripts of today's movies and television shows. They have the power to greatly influence public opinion, and thus the responsibility to be better educated on world events before weighing in on affairs of state.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Free Republic; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: hussein; iraq; seanpenn; speicher; spelingcountz
I am certainly not "fonda" Sean Penn after his visit to Iraq - particularly after he left the Capt. Speicher issue untouched!
1 posted on 01/08/2003 12:46:57 PM PST by Conservative News Hound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
Celebrity opinion is given to much regard on this, and many other issues. Personally, I give celebrity opinion the same regard dogs give trees, fire hydrants, and tires.
2 posted on 01/08/2003 12:49:25 PM PST by Keith in Iowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
You need to poorfeard!
3 posted on 01/08/2003 12:50:17 PM PST by Petronski (I'm not always cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
"Celebrities...is there anything they don't know?" - Homer Simpson.
4 posted on 01/08/2003 12:53:43 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
Are you being series? Or just a facist looser?

:)

5 posted on 01/08/2003 12:55:36 PM PST by Constitution Day (WYBMADIITY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
read later
6 posted on 01/08/2003 12:58:57 PM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
Celebrities never educated themselves on the Soviet Union, Red China, Vietnam, Cuba, or the rest. Why should they start with Iraq? With knowledge comes responsibility. Ignorance is bliss.
7 posted on 01/08/2003 1:03:28 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
Celebrities should be seen and not heard...
8 posted on 01/08/2003 2:46:11 PM PST by TheSpottedOwl (When life gives you lemons, order a bottle of Tequila and some salt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
It's simple ideology. Saddam is a Stalinist-Marxist, and so are the Hollywierd left.

"War for oil", "anti-war", "whatever", are just cover for what they really are.

-Pro-Saddam, Pro-Marxist, Anti-American Scum.

9 posted on 01/08/2003 6:41:32 PM PST by PeaceBeWithYou (We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
What I like to say in response to this obvious claim is:

Can you think of any better reason to go to war? The world and America needs oil, they've got it. They want to sell it, but they also want to use it as a weapon. Do we just stand by and let them? In all of these countries we should say:

We want the oil, you can sell without strings OR we'll take it. Also, how much oil would they have, if American hadn't developed the fields?

People (read leftists) need to get over America asserting its vital interests. Oil is vital, why else would you fight a foriegn war.

10 posted on 01/09/2003 4:01:26 AM PST by cb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Keith in Iowa
"celebrities" (and I use that term lightly) don't even know what homework is. All they know is ME, ME, ME, I,I,I, myself, myself, myself, money, money, money, demand, demand, demand and plastic surgery, more plastic surgery and even more plastic surgery until their faces fall off!
11 posted on 01/09/2003 7:56:36 AM PST by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound
"In April 1998, Iraq released an Iranian pilot, Hossein Lashgari, whose plane had been shot down in southern Iraq on Sept. 18, 1980 during the Iran-Iraq war. Although the Iran-Iraq War ended almost 15 years ago, several thousand Iranian prisoners of war are still held captive in Iraq. Likewise, over 600 Kuwaiti prisoners of war are still missing and believed held in Iraq over a decade after the close of the Gulf War in 1991."

Are you defending the Iranians? I think they are more evil than Saddam!

12 posted on 01/10/2003 8:23:48 AM PST by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Keith in Iowa
I agree. They aren't worth the p___ on doggie newspapers.
13 posted on 01/10/2003 9:43:10 AM PST by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cb
This is from an Ayn Rand appearance on "Donohue" in 1980:

"MR. DONAHUE: All right. Okay. You also think if the Middle Eastern countries want to charge -- hold us up for the oil at $5 a barrel -- a gallon --Excuse me. Five dollars. Will that day ever be back? They ought to be able to do it. It's their oil. Is that your point?

MS. RAND: No. My point is, we should not have to admit it, altruistically, all those nations to nationalize what we built for them.

AUDIENCE: (applause)

MS. RAND: They took our oil.

MR. DONAHUE: Well, what do you mean? It's not our oil. It's not our — We don't own Saudi Arabia. They do.

MS. RAND: We own, by contract right, the installations which we devised to begin with, and we helped them to build.

MR. DONAHUE: But it sounds like you're saying because we exported our technology, therefore, they owe us — That sounds like the altruism that you condemned a moment ago.

MS. RAND: How? Altruism is the unearned, and this we earned, and they nationalized from us. They have no right to their soil, if they do nothing with it. Rights are not involved in those primitive societies. But they make a deal with us. They want to bring us in to develop their oil, and then, they try to exploit and to literally murder us by means of that oil. That is an unforgivable crime.

MR. DONAHUE: They would argue that — I mean, some in the Middle East would argue that it's -- First of all, it's their oil. They're grateful for whatever technology we were able to share with them, but they will claim that they paid for that -- That they responded by presenting us with monies that were appropriate to the services we tendered them, and that let's not expect any favors for them, and that the world markets -- laws of supply and demand should determine what the price of oil is.

MS. RAND: They wouldn't be in the position of monopolies, as they have today, if we hadn't calmly agreed to let them nationalize our oil production.

MR. DONAHUE: Okay. Then that's our problem. Then we should have been more foresighted when we —

MS. RAND: — Oh, certainly. I agree with you.

MR. DONAHUE: All right. Well, why should we make them pay now for what we failed to put into our contract with them?

MS. RAND: We're not making them pay. We're buying the oil---

MR. DONAHUE: — Well, we are if we're insisting on getting oil at a cheaper price.

MS. RAND: We merely bargain and give in every time. And in a proper society, a government would never let it come that far. But let me answer one point you made, that this is our oil. No, it isn't. It was there for centuries, and they didn't know what to do with it. We don't export our technology. We export our minds and our knowledge, without which they couldn't exist, and they admit it. They nationalize oil in a lot of those countries, and then want the Americans, or a few Europeans to come and help them run it. They can't even run the oil in, you see, after they copied everything from us. It can't be done. So they're expropriating, you see?"

14 posted on 01/10/2003 1:35:45 PM PST by reasonseeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
Are you being series? Or just a facist looser?

Well, by now it is a mute point. ;-)

15 posted on 01/11/2003 12:58:27 PM PST by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Conservative News Hound; All
The Iraqi-Bin Laden Connection
16 posted on 01/11/2003 1:25:49 PM PST by Republican_Strategist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123
I agree that the Iranian regime is behind - in one shape or another- all of the Shiite terrorism, drug trafficking, etc.. that plagues the U.S. and the West

However, that does not mean that Iraq is justified in holding Iranian military personnel captive 15 years after the war ended. By your logic we would still be holding German & Japanese troops in POW camps..

Combatting horrific regimes does not translate into committing atrocities upon the average foot soldiers that they conscript..

Note: I do not consider terrorists and other non-state soldiers to be military personnel or subject to the rights and privileges of a POW - memebers of al Qaeda should be questioned with all means possible to discern future attacks and sleeper cells
17 posted on 01/12/2003 8:39:25 PM PST by Conservative News Hound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson