This year we are likely to see a regime change in Bagdad and if we’re very lucky in Pyongyang. Brussels would be taking optimisim perhaps a bit far!
It occurs to me that this is an area in which libertarians who are sceptical of the public relations exercise known as the “Saddam’s the worst thing since Hitler” can agree with the libertarian interventionists. It also shows up the fundamental dishonesty of the leftist “peace” campaigners.
Talking to a “peace” protestor a couple of weeks ago I was informed of the following alleged facts:
- that Iraq was a client of the US and armed by the Reagan and Bush senior presidencies.
- that the people of Iraq would bear the brunt of any US led military intervention.
- that the sanctions against Iraq were killing hundreds of children every day;
- that the US was only interested in manipulating the oil price, though I’m clear whether it is supposed to go up or down.
- that the “peace” protestors are against any war and in no way endorsing the Iraqi regime (which remains nameless).
Contrast the claims with the attitudes of the same people about the regimes of general Pinochet in Chile and the apartheid regime in South Africa.
- The left claimed that both were US client states, so why didn’t the peace protestors defend those regimes from proposed US sanctions? Obviously the “client state” claim is irrelevant or untrue.
- If the people are going to suffer most from military action, how come they don’t defend the German people who suffered from a terrible invasion in 1945: Soviet troops were ordered to rape every German woman they could find in Berlin. The “peace” protestors are not normally known for minimising the trauma of multiple rapes on women and children.
- How come the South African children who presumably suffered from the leftist inspired sanctions against South Africa weren’t worth defending? Perhaps they were meant to suffer and become useful puppets in a Soviet war of liberation.
- So where were these “peace” protestors when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands in 1982, or when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, or Vietnam invaded Cambodia in 1980 (admittedly they must have been confused by this one)?
Funny how it’s only the regimes that support socialism (preferably of a racialist tendency) or anti-modern theocracy that are deemed worthy of “peace” protestor support.
A Commie is a Commie is a Commie. There are grounds for opposing war, but the Communist Dictator Defence League isn’t one of them.