I remember well General Colin Powell presenting his charts and irrefutable evidence, proof positive, that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and must be “taken out.” Yes, he was a ruthless dictator. However, he was [also an] ally, our friend.
Our Government did not object when he gassed the Kurds. Very little was said about it in the media or anywhere. Yes, he used poison gas on the Iranians. Our Government didn’t mind. In fact we continued to supply him with intelligence and weapons. He may have been a bastard, but he was our bastard–that is, until he invaded Kuwait.
Even though Iraq never attacked us and militarily was never a threat to us, without Congress declaring war, our Country invaded Iraq. You know the rest, or do you?
Are you aware that our sanctions were so strict, that an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of five years died, from very treatable diseases, as a result of our Government’s sanctions?
What problem did our sanctions and invasion of Iraq solve?
So, now, Syrian President Bashar al Assad and his Government stand accused of using poison gas on their own people. Certainly this is a violation of the rules of war, of the Geneva Convention. It is an obscene, inhuman act that the nations of the world should not tolerate.
Still, what rule of law allows the U. S. to be prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner? How can we be sure our missiles will kill only the “bad guys?” What unexpected consequences are we prepared to deal with?
Many pride themselves in calling the U. S. a Christian Nation. How does sending cruise [guided] missiles to rain on Damascus square with the non-violent Jesus, who accepted death on the cross rather than answer violence with violence?
I do believe that there is a just, viable, and non-violent response that upholds our values as a morally-responsible people. We can take our evidence to the United Nations General Assembly and make our case. We can ask the Assembly to convict Assad and his Government and to declare them to be an illegitimate Government.
- This would free all those who have taken an oath to support this Government and its laws from continuing to obey.
- It would mean that any agreements this Government has made are no longer binding.
- It would mean that any entity that loans this Government money may not collect it from the Syrian people.
- It would mean withdrawing ambassadors and an end to their ambassadors’ diplomatic immunity.
- It would also mean those who continue to implement government-sponsored atrocities could not plead they were just following orders; they could be tried as war criminals.
This action would hurt Assad, but not the innocents under his thumb. It would uphold our values and set the right example for the world.