WASHINGTON -- In the months after our invasion of Iraq -- our
liberation of Iraq -- there was a neat little peace
movement. It was composed of the likes of linguist Noam Chomsky,
Ramsey Clark, and various lesser patheticos who all looked like
they belonged on the streets of Berkeley, California, some with
begging pots in their hands.
That this forlorn band did not grow for many months was no
surprise to me. America had suffered 3,000 casualties at home, not
one of whom had been engaged in warfare against anyone. The tyrant
we took down had taunted us, boasted of his danger to us, and
hosted terrorists in his capital. There was no debate about this.
The United States had attacked a modern-day Hitler who was not as
clever as the original and was encouraging enemies of our country.
The brute Saddam was actually sending rewards to the families of
terrorists. What kind of zanies would join a peace movement against
this military effort to do about what Franklin Roosevelt and
Winston Churchill did in the early 1940s?
President Roosevelt did what he did despite the Neutrality Acts
against military assistance to foreign powers, even foreign powers
defending themselves against the Nazis. Very boldly Roosevelt broke
the law and he did so repeatedly. Since then he has been held up as
an international hero. He conquered the fascists, the Nazis, and
the Japanese militarists. He enshrined in oratory and in statutes
high-minded notions of international human rights. He was the
driving force behind the United Nations. George W. Bush and his
associates were only making good on Roosevelt's promises. And they
did so despite a melancholy fact, to wit: FDR's dearly envisioned
United Nations is as corrupt as any Third-World oligarchy.
President Bush attended to its empty protocols and then took
action. The subsequent complaint was that the president did not do
more at the United Nations. I suppose he could have bought Kofi
Annan's colleagues off.
Now we have a rather larger peace movement in the United States,
and it is being treated with grave respect by the bien
pensants. Still, this peace movement is pretty much confined
to the zanies. The other night as the President was giving his
State of the Union speech they gathered in Washington around the
statue to General U.S. Grant on the Capitol grounds singing "All
You Need Is Love," "Give Peace a Chance," and, who knows, maybe
that song about the yellow submarine or "One Hundred Bottles of
Beer on the Wall"?
Their Gandhi is Cindy Sheehan, who is either a lunatic or one of
the many self-promoters who with little talent and no demonstrated
knowledge of international relations become media stars on behalf
of peace. Mrs. Sheehan was given a ticket to the State of the Union
speech by a member of Congress. Would you care to guess which party
that member represents? The member's name is Lynn C. Woolsey and
she insists, "I didn't see this as a political act at all." One of
the Democrats' complaints about the President is that he is a liar.
What is the Hon. Woolsey?
Once in the gallery Mrs. Sheehan began demonstrating, though
there are those in the media who doubt this. She undid her jacket
revealing a T-shirt with an anti-war message. She began drawing
attention to herself. She was arrested. Now there are people in the
press who doubt the Capitol Police's claim that she acted
inappropriately. The police claim she was "boisterous." There is a
law against demonstrating in the House gallery. Now on the talk
shows the great debate begins: Was Mrs. Sheehan boisterous or not?
Was she demonstrating?
Mrs. Sheehan has spent all of her brief public life
demonstrating, but apparently despite the involvement of this
Democratic congresswoman and despite her anti-war T-shirt persons
in press want to argue that she was not demonstrating. This is an
infantile debate. In fact, the whole peace movement is an infantile
movement. There is to this day no one to negotiate "peace" with in
Iraq. There is no alternative to our police action. The vast
majority of Iraqis wants peace, and most recognize that the only
hope for peace resides with the American army or what some persist
in calling the Coalition forces. That so many of the supposedly
civilized nations of the world have not contributed to those forces
is the shame of this war. That so many of the Democrats have not
stood by this president the way Republicans stood by FDR is another
shame. And Mrs. Sheehan, button up that jacket and quiet down.
topics:
Law, Military, Iraq, United Nations
