‘Anti-war’ is too simple a response | SierraSun.com

‘Anti-war’ is too simple a response

GUEST COLUMN by Lydia T. Percin

The “anti-war protestors” believe they are unique in spouting “we do not want war.” Truthfully, no one wants war. Yet they personally attack those who daringly disagree, calling them “pro-war”, “war monger”, “lunatic”, “moron”, “greedy”, or worse. Calling people like President Bush, Tony Blair, and others “pro-war” is like calling a “pro-choice” advocate, “pro-abortion.”

If our President was a “pro-war-monger” seeking “revenge” for his father and/or personal financial gain as the protestors claim, he would have immediately attacked Iraq – he did not.

The “protestors” should be thankful that in the US they have freedom of speech, and should acknowledge that saying such things in Iraq (or in former Taliban ruled Afghanistan) lead to the torture, gassing and/or murder of millions of Iraqi citizens. We are lucky to have leaders doing what is best for our country, rather than succumbing to uninformed protestors.

These courageous leaders are protecting even protestors who personally attack them!

In fact, most “anti-war protestors” are pacifists. They include people that refuse to advocate aggression under any circumstances, along with people that believe there is no “downside” to “waiting.”

Most pacifists positions are overly simplistic – Their heads are in the sand, either petrified by fear or naivete.

In attacking our president as an aggressor, pacifists ignore the fact that absent his tough threats and United Nations speech last September, the UN inspectors would not be in Iraq, and Iraq would not have bulldozed 16 of 120-plus missiles.

Unfortunately, “threats” alone have not succeeded in complete Iraqi disarmament. Pacifists may even disagree with the UN’s multiple resolutions. If they do not disagree, they must revel in the UN’s growing Passivity, failing to “strictly enforce” it’s own resolutions, all while ignoring the motives of the international pacifists. Such motives and passivity have made the UN irrelevant.

Pacifists naively believe that if left undisturbed a sleeping dog it will never bite and/or that Hussein will have a change of heart and/or that in big country like Iraq the inspectors could actually locate stockpiles of hidden and mobile weapons even though Iraqi’s have advance knowledge of their every move. (This belief is even in the face of reports such as that from the former head of the Iraqi Atomic weapons program that Iraq’s nuclear (purchased from Russia, France and Germany) and biological weapons are mobile and/or hidden in civilian areas. (Khidhir Hamza, “Bomb Maker”.)

If Iraq has no such weapons, how did he gas his own people? Why such high cancer and birth defect rates in Iraq?

Pacifists should learn from history. Prior to World War 2 pacifists “gave” Czechoslovakia to Hitler hoping for “Peace in Our Time.” France tolerated Hitler’s encroachment into their own country in violation of the World War 1 Armistice and 1919 Treaty of Versaille.

Pacifism provided Hitler with more time and audacity to overrun countries and kill millions more innocent people, only to be stopped when the U.S. pacifists finally agreed to become involved. Passivity now is more dangerous with modern weapons of mass destruction that will permeate our borders.

Pacifists either overlook all the lives lost at the U.S.S. Cole, African embassies, WTC (1993) and on 9/11 or are petrified in fear of another attack. They turn a blind eye to the post-9/11 celebrations in Iraq and the assassination attempt on President Bush I. They fail to recognize the need to defend ourselves, or are afraid that if we attack them, they will attack us.

Guess what, war has already been waged on us by the Islamic Extremists, including Hussein. The disarmament is effectively postponed, the bigger and more deadly the next attack will be.