Bush is to blame and not the Iraqi people and we must remember that

By Mary MacElveen

November 29, 2006

In the American criminal justice system victims of rape, sexual harassment is often blamed by the defense attorney representing the rapist.  As I was reading this Washington Post column As Iraq Deteriorates, Iraqis Get More Blame the same can be said for blaming the Iraqi people for the strife and civil war that now surrounds them.

I would say, let us put the blame squarely where it belongs and that is on President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and any other person or persons that have promulgated this illegal war.

I have written in past columns that the citizens of Iraq have faced a 9/11 event on a daily basis for over three years now, yet when we think of our own victims of 9/11, do we dare blame them for the acts of terror that took their lives?  Of course we do not.

When it came to the ransacking of Iraq’s national museum, this is what Donald Rumsfeld had to say, "Stuff happens." Now ask yourselves, how would you respond if some foreign occupying force came and looted any number of our national museums and was dismissive as Rumsfeld was?  You would be angry beyond belief.

When I read, "more than three years later, with schools and hospitals struggling, electrical service faltering, and police and government agencies infiltrated by sectarian death squads, the question of blame is more urgent." Let us remember who is truly to blame for all of this and that is the Bush administration.  They are guilty of illegally invading this country leading to the breakdown and demise of these schools, hospitals and other supportive services that were operative prior to our invasion.

Let us not forget and I cannot stress this enough.  We have used depleted uranium and white phosphorus on the Iraqi people killing innocent victims including children and we expect them to react rationally?  How dare we even suggest that they do?  What we will leave that country is a toxic waste land.  For those of you that do not know this, DU (depleted uranium) has a half life of 4.5 billion years.  That is Bush’s legacy and he must own it.  Children for decades to come will be born with the most insidious birth defects and we expect them to react rationally?  We have burnt the flesh off of the bones of those in Fallujah and we expect them to rise to such a challenge?  What hubris we have.

Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), stated, "We should put the responsibility for Iraq's future squarely where it belongs -- on the Iraqis," Well, Senator Levin, that is under normal circumstances and not the present abnormal circumstances that are growing increasingly violent.  Just how are rational Iraqis supposed to rise to this challenge as they flee their homes?  As mothers and fathers are killed before their children’s eyes or the other way around, who exactly is responsible for creating this chaos?  Prior to our invasion while they were led by a despot in Hussein, they did not have groups such as Al Qaeda crossing the border.  In fact Hussein would not have tolerated that.

Senator Levin went onto say, "We cannot save the Iraqis from themselves." I would say that it is up to the new Democratic majority to put pressure on the Bush administration to avail themselves of any help coming out of Iraq itself to help the Iraqi people.  That means even asking for help coming from Iran's President Ahmadinejad.  That would at least show a great faith effort in any progress towards a final peace.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) stated, "the Iraqis are incapable of solving their own problems through the political process and will resort to violence, and we need to get the hell out of there." I would agree with the latter since it is our sheer presence that is to blame and how can any normal political process take place within this war ravaged country?  Right now they are incapable, but how are they supposed to show any capability given the current circumstances.

Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.). made the following statement and it burns me as he said it, "If the Iraqis are determined and decide to destroy themselves and their country, I don't know how in the world we're going to stop them," It means taking President Bush out of the equation and letting other world leaders especially coming from the Arab world take the lead. 

The one that has made more sense than any voice coming from Washington, D.C. is Jordan's King Abdullah.  At this point, I do not think that the Iraqis trust us nor should they. I would think that any rational person within Washington, D.C. realizes that we must divorce our country's say in this matter and let others take the lead.  We must first apologize to the Iraqi people for destroying their country and apologize to the world for bringing about this instability now seen as a civil war.  But, then again, I just do not see President Bush apologizing to the Iraqi people and to the world.  It is not within his character to do so.  He does not have the moral fortitude to even understand that he lied and must now admit that he did.  Yet, he expects morality to come from others?

In an email, CIA Middle East expert Ray Close said, "I'm tired of nit-picking over how we should bully the Iraqis into becoming better citizens of their own country," That is perhaps one of the most rational sentiments expressed.  Yes, we have bullied the Iraqi people and we expect them to react the way we want?  Why should they even listen to the United States at this point?  We raped their country and we expect only complicity to our will to be the final result?

The United States as far as democracy and freedom goes is but a mere infant compared to how these societies have governed themselves for thousands of years and they are supposed to listen to us?  I think that in trying to teach them how things must be done is one of narcissism and hubris.

Here is a neat idea, let us govern by example.  Let us prove to the Arab world that we are able to teach other countries through acts of non-violence and honesty.  Let us say to the Arab world that every country is accountable in following the laws of the United Nations.  No one should be excluded.  We expect the Arab world to follow the UN resolutions, yet we and other western societies have turned out backs on Israel’s non-compliance?  Just how fair is that?  Why are some held accountable where others are not?

We have sanctioned countries such as Iraq and seek to sanction Iran for their non-compliance of UN resolutions, yet Israel has thumbed its nose and has not complied with one single resolution.  What message does that send?

No, I will not use divisive words such as Zionism and no I am not anti-Semitic, but I will suggest that we all come to the table in some possible peace process and put together a fairness doctrine which states no country is above the law.  I truly believe that will rip apart any terrorist recruitment message.  What would be their campaign if everyone was following the rule of law and was treated equally?  I find that to be the most rational and logical step.

All in all, I found this Washington Post article as divisive as they come.  What they have shown in writing it is that the victims are to blame and not those that perpetrated the crime in the first place.  Yes, it is criminal to invade a country that did not attack us in the first place.  That is also what is being left out of the equation.  We are forgetting that we are the rapists and the Iraqis are the victims.  Until we get that through our thick skulls, this will only exacerbate this civil war.