Iraq: Lights Out for the Myths

On December 2nd, the United States military officially handed over administration of Camp Victory to the Iraqi government. The sprawling palace complex of former dictator Saddam Hussein long served as the American military headquarters in Iraq. By the end of the calendar year, all U.S. forces will be out of Iraq (save for a small training force remaining behind to instruct the Iraqis). As we prepare to officially close the books on U.S. military operations in Iraq, perhaps we can finally also put to bed the many myths propagated by the Left as to the reasons for our intervention and its results.

Bush lied, people died. There were no WMDs in Iraq. We went in for the oil. We had no grounds for going into Iraq. Saddam Hussein and Iraq had no connection to 9/11 or Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. We said we were freeing the Iraqi people, but we were just oppressing them.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present the quick and easy guide to refuting all of the above absurdities (click on the hyperlinks—you’ll need them).

First, an incredibly inconvenient historical video clip: does any of this sound familiar?

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAV_UoIfgc&w=420&h=315]

 

Bush lied (people died)—there were no WMDs in Iraq.

While US forces never recovered nuclear weapons from the country and its nuclear program was defunct, that doesn’t mean there were no WMDs there. It was a well-established fact that Saddam Hussein’s regime had used chemical weapons in the past, massacring thousands of Kurds in 1988.

Saddam maintained stockpiles of those weapons. Unsurprisingly, hundreds of WMDs were found in Iraq. Coalition forces continued to find them years after the invasion. Next time someone tells you there were no WMDs in Iraq, point them to these articles. Also ask them what they think was on the secret 56 flights from Baghdad to Damascus right before the invasion. Georges Sada, the former head of the Iraqi Air Force, says it was WMDs. I believe him.

I’m very happy to say, in this case, the Democrats were absolutely right.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc&w=420&h=315]

 

We went in for the oil.

That’s great. Where is it? If that’s the case, why did we let them award the overwhelming majority of oil development contracts to foreign firms? Why didn’t we just take it? Surely we could have… Where is/was the “Great U.S. Oil Bonanza” in Iraq?

We had no grounds for going into Iraq.

On the contrary, we had plenty of grounds for going into Iraq. Shortly after the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein remained in defiance of countless UN Security Council Resolutions including non-compliance and subversion of the IAEA.  The Security Council is in charge of enforcing its own resolutions. Since the other countries on the council refused to do so (France had a history of helping Iraq with nuclear technology and close ties to the country), the US and UK went in to enforce the resolutions.

Saddam Hussein and Iraq had no connection to 9/11 or Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden.

In fact, Iraq and Bin Laden had a running relationship that included many correspondences and meetings between the 1990’s and the start of the Iraq War. These included meetings with high-ranking Iraqi officials in Afghanistan and/or Sudan.

We weren’t freeing the Iraqi people; we were oppressing them.

In 2005, for the first time, the Iraqi people voted in free, democratic elections and adopted a state constitution.  The country is now governed by a coalition of Iraqi political parties, not a dictator. As a result of the relative stability and establishment of the new government, the long-decried UN sanctions against the country have been lifted. For the moment, Iraq stands with Israel as one of the only two democracies in the Middle East.

I humbly ask: how is deposing a brutal dictator and installing democratic government oppressive? There is no way to intelligently argue that the Iraqi people would have been better off under the former regime. Ever meet Saddam Hussein or his sons Uday and Qusay? No? Then you never had a chance to experience their reign of terror up close.

Don’t these just look like images of oppression?

Soldier forces children to perform manual labor

Soldier distributes highly dangerous black and white "sphere of death"

Soldier steals children away from their mothers

Soldier tortures children into smiling

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin Reagan // George Washington University // @O_JoseCanYouSee

Related News

7 Responses

Leave a Reply
  1. Hébergement site web
    Mar 21, 2012 - 08:16 PM

    Its such as you learn my mind! You seem to know a lot approximately this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I believe that you could do with some percent to pressure the message home a little bit, but other than that, that is excellent blog. A great read. I will definitely be back.

    Reply
  2. Jose
    Dec 17, 2011 - 12:34 AM

    Grasping at straws.

    I find it hilarious that some of you so called “conservatives”, believe that the Federal Government cannot properly run the post office but can perfectly run the affairs of other nations.

    Any hint of the government’s foreign policy failure and blowback consequences are met with mindless duckspeak of “USA! USA!” chants or 9-11 references or “but but but Israel”. Its so absurd that I just laugh at these people deluding themselves to be “conservatives”.

    You lot need to put down their Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly books and pick up a Russell Kirk or a Tom Woods. Two generations ago, you would have been laughed off by anyone who considered themselves a serious conservative.

    Reply
  3. Drew
    Dec 15, 2011 - 10:15 PM

    THis article cites several weak sources, wait. let me publish a website with contrary facts, I’ll reserve the domain, Sadaamfacts.com , put some unverifiable quotes loaded with conjecture, which will prove that indeed Sadaam Hussein is Santa Claus. You laugh, but that is the quality of your sources and the flaws within them.

    Reply
  4. rational
    Dec 15, 2011 - 07:57 PM

    WHAT CONNECTION DID SADDAM HUSSEIN HAVE TO THE WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBINGS?????? NONE. ISN’T THAT THE REASON WHY THOUSANDS OF SOLDIERS DIED, TO DEFEND OUR NATION AGAINST THE BOMBINGS ON 9/11? SO WHY DID WE INVADE IRAQ. WHY DIDN”T WE INVADE THE DOZEN OTHER NATIONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT HAVE DICTATORS THAT MURDER INNOCENT CITIZENS?

    Reply
  5. Not one to accept easy answers
    Dec 14, 2011 - 02:39 PM

    Did you read the articles you referenced? If you did, how does this quote support your claims?

    “Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

    ‘This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991,’ the official said, adding the munitions ‘are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.’”

    Reply
  6. Kerry the conservative
    Dec 10, 2011 - 01:53 AM

    Another excellent piece… I am really impressed with you guys!!

    Reply
  7. koala
    Dec 09, 2011 - 10:02 AM

    Excellent! This is how one deals with misinformation, by presenting the facts. I love it when the truth comes out. I am saving your article. Well done and keep up the good work.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyrıght 2014 THE COLLEGE CONSERVATIVE.

Facebook

Twitter