Posted on 14-5-2003
Devil
In The Details
By Molly Ivins, Creators Syndicate, Sunday 12 May 2003
AUSTIN, Texas -- "We ought to be beating our chests every day.
We ought
to look in a mirror and be proud, and stick out our chests and
suck in our
bellies, and say, 'Damn, we're Americans!' " -- Jay Garner,
retired general
and the man in charge of the American occupation of Iraq.
Thus it is with a sense of profound relief that one hears the
news that
Garner is about to be replaced by a civilian with nation-building
experience. I realize we have all been too busy with the Laci
Peterson
affair to notice that we're still sitting on a powder keg in
Iraq, but
there it is. In case you missed it, a million Iraqi Shiites
made a
pilgrimage to Karbala, screaming, "No to America!"
Funny how media attention slips just at the diciest moments.
I doubt the
United States was in this much danger at any point during the
actual war.
Whether this endeavor in Iraq will turn out to be worth the
doing is now at
a critical point, and the media have decided it's no longer
a story. Boy,
are we not being served well by American journal-ism. Anent
the current
difficulties, Newsweek 's report today on Donald Rumsfeld's
favorite Iraqi,
Ahmad Chalabi, leaves one with the strong impression we should
not be
putting all our eggs in that particular basket. But the weirdest
media
reaction of all is to the ongoing nonappearance of weapons of
mass
destruction in Iraq. More and more stories quoting ever-unnamed
administration officials appear saying the administration would
be "amazed
if we found weapons-grade plutonium or uranium" and that finding
large
volumes of chemical or biological material is "unlikely."
Look, if there are no WMDs in Iraq, it means either our government
lied
us to us in order to get us into an unnecessary war or the government
itself was disastrously misinformed by an incompetent intelligence
apparatus. In either case, it's a terribly serious situation.
What I cannot
believe is that respected journalists, most notably Tom Friedman,
a
two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, would simply dismiss the nonexistent
WMDs
as though it made no difference. Of course it matters if our
government
lies to us. Why do you think people were so angry at Lyndon
Johnson over
the Gulf of Tonkin? At Richard Nixon over the "secret war" in
Cambodia?
Even at Bill Clinton over the less-cosmic matter of whether
he had sex with
"that woman." If it makes no difference whether the government
lied, why is
Friedman a journalist? Why does journalism exist at all?
Nonexistent WMDs also present us with a huge international credibility
problem, particularly since the Bush administration now feels
entitled to
"punish" those countries that did not join the "coalition of
willing," as
we so preciously called those who caved in to our threats to
cut off
foreign aid.
Come on, think about this. The Bush administration apparently
feels
entitled to take actions punishing close old friends, including
Mexico and
Canada -- not to mention the Europeans -- for not siding with
us in a war
we may have lied about? This is not going to sit well with the
rest of the
world. Sy Hersh's reportage in the current New Yorker should
be read
carefully. The Friedman camp's reasoning on "lies don't matter"
is that
Saddam Hussein was such a miserable bastard that taking him
out was worthy
in and of itself. As a human rights supporter all these years,
I made that
argument, too. I even made it when the Reagan administration
was giving
Saddam WMDs. But that was not the case made by President Bush.
He said
Saddam Hussein was a clear and present danger who posed an imminent
threat
to the United States because he had chemical and biological
weapons he was
prepared to hand over to terrorists at any moment.
The administration detailed those weapons with excruciating
precision:
5,000 gallons of anthrax, several tons of VX nerve gas, between
100 and 500
tons of other toxins including botulinin, mustard gas, ricin
and Sarin, 15
to 20 Scud missiles, drones fitted with poison sprays and mobile
chemical
laboratories. The reason Bush could not make the human rights
case against
Saddam Hussein (as Tony Blair did) is because we're still supplying
other
monsters with weaponry. (Algeria, anyone?) John Quincy Adams
said, "We go
not abroad in search of monsters to destroy." We shouldn't help
create
them, either.
Maybe we can learn that much from Saddam Hussein
|