The case against Iraq

“By Thomas Sowell, syndicated columnist

History does not literally repeat itself, but sometimes it comes awfully close. Iraq is not the first dangerous dictatorship that international agreements tried to keep disarmed. Nor is it the first where that effort failed.

Back in the 1930s, Germany's military forces were limited by a ban on conscription, by limitations on the number and kinds of weapons it could have, and by a requirement that it station no troops in its own industrialized Rhineland. These requirements were in the treaty of Versailles, which ended the First World War.


Demilitarizing the Rhineland was perhaps the crucial provision of these international restrictions.


Germany's population and industrial might, together with its strong military traditions and its aggressive policies which had brought on the First World War, made it the most dangerous nation on the continent of Europe. But it could not attack any other nation when its own industrial heartland was undefended and therefore could be quickly seized by French troops, who were just across the Rhine.


Like Saddam Hussein today, Hitler at first pretended to go along with these restrictions, all the while clandestinely building up his military forces. However, this was clandestine only in the sense that the general public did not know about it. British intelligence was well aware of what he was doing and kept the Prime Minister informed.


The real question was whether Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin wanted to be the one to break the bad news to the British public or whether he would keep quiet, get re-elected, and pass the problem on to his successors -- as Bill Clinton would do in a later era. Baldwin did a Clinton.


In later years, Stanley Baldwin tried to justify his inaction:


"Supposing I had gone to the country and said that Germany was rearming, and that we must rearm, does anybody think that this pacific democracy would have rallied to that cry at that moment? I cannot think of anything that would have made the loss of the election from my point of view more certain."


But this was not just Baldwin's failure or that of his Conservative Party. The Liberal Party in 1935 demanded "clear proof" of a need for rearmament against the Nazis, much as many in politics and the media today are demanding "clear proof" of a need to act against Saddam Hussein.


Meanwhile the Labour Party was advocating disarmament and innumerable groups were promoting international agreements and diplomatic exchanges as a substitute for military power. Diplomatic agreements and arms limitations treaties proliferated throughout the whole period between the two World Wars.


None of this had any practical effect, except to lull the Western democracies into inaction while Germany and Japan rapidly built up their military forces.


Hitler began openly violating the restrictions put on Germany, one at a time, allowing him to gauge what reaction there would be among the Western powers and in the League of Nations. Each violation that he got away with led him to try another -- and then another.


The key violation -- without which he would not be able to wage war -- was moving German troops into the Rhineland in 1936, in open defiance of the treaty of Versailles. Both he and his generals knew that the French army was so overwhelmingly more powerful at this point that German troops would not have been able to put up even token resistance if France sent its troops in to oust them.


France did nothing. It was the first of many nothings that France did in a series of crises that led up to World War II.


When Hitler had built up his clandestine forces sufficiently, he simply stopped keeping them secret and confronted the West with enough power that he knew they would not dare to challenge him. The opportunity to stop him was past.


Those who wanted "clear proof" now had it. In just a few years, they would have even clearer proof when the Nazis invaded France and subjugated it in just six weeks -- and then began bombing London, night after night.


While history does not literally repeat itself, sometimes it comes very close.”

“dayhiker,,,,tsk, tsk, tsk...

why do you invite so much abuse so late in the week?”

“Resisting urge....”

“Four words: Cheese eating surrender monkeys.”

“Somebody has to post both sides of an issue. The server is down at work, so I'm bored. I thought I might be that person!”

“Wow, Dayhiker, that's a big load of comparison you got going there.

Point one. It also took the agressive policies of France and Britain to bring about WW1.

Point two. The Treaty of Versailles was, in many ways, just an extension of British and French aggression. Woodrow Wilson fought many of the provisions of that treaty. And, if you read your history, you'll see the oft-quote phrase, "WW2 began with the Treaty of Versailles".
Point three. As Colin Powell tried to show in his speech, the nations of the West, primarily the US have spy technology that shows us much of what Iraq has in the way of weaponry, and where it is. There will be no surprise or "blitzkrieg" coming from Iraq.
Point four. There was no international community bringing pressure to bear upon Nazi Germany to disarm, in the way that the UN is confronting Iraq. Even the French, who many like to villainize, are backing efforts to make Sadaam Hussein desist with his weapons campaign.

I don't see a clear parallel between Nazi Germany and present-day Iraq. Besides, we have the histrorical precedent that they set when they folded like a house of cards the first time the Allies kicked their butts. I think this article you are touting is just trying to beat the war drums.”

“Since the Islamic terror groups are salivating at the prospect of an American invasion of Iraq and the thousands of fresh recruits the suffering inflicted on Iraqi civilians would bring, I guess it’s fair to point out that those calling for war are really ‘Osama enablers’.

Why do you hate America so, dayhiker?”

“I don't hate America or think that Saddam is the next Hitler, just trying to stir a pot without hiding behind a troll, like I usually do.”

“"Even the French, who many like to villainize, are backing efforts to make Sadaam Hussein desist with his weapons campaign."
Dunadan
04:02:20 PM
02/07/03

(...best inspector Cluseau voice)
Mon dieu, you nasty man, ve insist you stop immediately vith ze making of ze bims and ze poison gas or ve shall shower you vith ze brie and baguettes. Sacre bleu, cannot you se zat ve are upset vith you? Kato, you sneaky swine, attack!!!”

“Four words: Cheese eating surrender monkeys."
Artex
03:48:53 PM
02/07/03

Ditto

Great article dayhiker, the truth hurts around here for some folks.”

“I don't really think you do, dayhiker. I was just dying to pull that on someone and you popped your head up. heh-heh”

“I'm laughing while I write this.
"Father Goose-step!"

ha ha ha ha ha ha”

“BTW - Everybody had an aggresive war policy in WWI, it was called brinkmanship.”

“I do feel it's time for military action, but Hitler is a little strong.

I loved the French stuff.

I have gotten to where I like reading Sowell. A conservative, black man who's an academic, yet bashes the academic status quo.”

“BTW - Everybody had an aggresive war policy in WWI, it was called brinkmanship."
Buddha Bear
04:17:12 PM
02/07/03

Let me add: France botched their strategy up because they were too busy charging German machine gun nests on horseback for 2 years.”

“"I'm laughing while I write this.
"Father Goose-step!"

ha ha ha ha ha ha"
Dunadan
04:16:12 PM
02/07/03

LOL!!!”

“So, the "Truth" is that Sadaam Hussein is a threat of the magnitude that Adolph Hitler was? Is that the "Truth", Bud Bare?
If that is, indeed the "Truth", what the hell are you doing stateside? You should be shipping out today to save the world from WW3.”

“The truth is that it's a valid comparison, and with the advent of nuclear, chemical and other hi-tech weapons, the dynamics of the situation proport similar threats.

Do'h!”

“I'm a little disappointed that no one is jumping on my educational quota thread.”

“I've been baited by better trolls than you.”

“LMAO Violin!”

“I haven't been very good at being a troll, that's why I didn't hide behind one. My Vio1in troll crashed and burned.”

“What's a troll?
























Can I have a cookie?”

“Phaedrus, you were biting your tongue. Jump in”

“Okay, I like oreos. A glass of milk would be nice as well.”

“Have you tried those new coffee oreos? They look good.”

“oooohhh an oreo degeneration, a TT first!”

“*takes a bow*

I always told people I was a trail blazer! It just took a few years for it to come out.”

“For more Sowell articles

Sowell”

“Since the Islamic terror groups are salivating at the prospect of an American invasion of Iraq and the thousands of fresh recruits the suffering inflicted on Iraqi civilians would bring, I guess it’s fair to point out that those calling for war are really ‘Osama enablers’.

Violin
04:03:24 PM
02/07/03

You watch too much tv. This is a cowards theory at best. There are no facts to support such a claim.”

“Irony is lost on bacpac.”

“sowell hosted limbbaugh today. i'de rather hear him thann rush anyday!

here's a quote for you mamby pamby, professional protester, beamer drivin, cheese fartin, old europe, weenies who think we ought bend over and let any tinhorn dictator make us look like fools.....





we can do that all by ourselves....


"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our
inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter
the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams”

“Stratdewd nails it!”

“Here's a strong link! Sadaam likes oreos! Hitler liked oreos!

LET THE BOMBING BEGIN!!!!!”

“oh my goodness......



i'm all verclempt......




ya'll discuss something....


i'll give you a topic....



the republican guard is neither a republican or a guard,,,,

discuss....”

“They certainly aren't the democratic guard.”

“We had an air-tight case against Augusto Pinochet. (Oooops, we put him into power.) Never mind.”

“that's the american media phaeddy....the democratic guard”

“Media includes talk radio and Fox News, you know.”

“You forgot the Wall Street Journal. Yea, the media consists of talk radio, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal.

I wish.”

“talk radio is political commetary phaed. dream on. fox is the only one on tv or radio that's not dripping with liberalism. BEEYATCH!


sorry, i'm feelin a lil fiesty tonight.”

“How bout MSN? Do you find their version of the news liberal?”

“Shut your pie-hole, Phaedrus! If we need to know what's liberal, Rush will tell us!
Ditto, ditto, ditto, ditto, ditto.................”

“Hey DUNADAN! I DON'T EAT THAT MUCH PIE!”

“Ever try Oreo pie?”

“Hmmm... That sounds like a pie I might just like.”

“never seen MSN phaed. i can't afford good cable cuz there ain't no money left after the taxman gets his cut. at any rate, it's too small to be a factor either way. i'm taking big media here. including the ones subsadized by the federal government, PBS and NPR.


grow up and admit it boys. ole stratdewd is telling the truth. you can't hise the truth forever. that explains the sucess of foxnews. people are tired of the shortsighted liberal perspective. ted turner's all ....hmmm..how come CNN is suckin so bad?....
LMFAO, well DUH! cuz FOX is kickin you AZZZZ!~”

“Well, folks, Strat just summed it all up once more. Why do I bother? I should just hand it over to the boy with ten acres.
Take it away, Strat.”

“Yep. I'll admit it, because I have finally figured out what YOU mean by liberal.

You mean open-minded and inquisitive. You've never really defined it before, so I'll just exchange the words "Open-minded" wherever you say "liberal". Now we can finally agree on something!

Fox news panders to the uninquisitive. I'll give you that. Rant on my friend!”

“Strat:

Did you just down a sixer of Keystone tallboyz again?”