In light of the one-sided exposure given to the Greens' activism against action in Iraq, allow me to argue in favor of the view held by the vast majority of Americans, both Republican and Democrat: that failure to remove Saddam will spell consequences too horrible to imagine here at home.
A nuclear Iraq is a scenario we have long feared but neglected to prevent. It took Sept. 11 and 3,000 dead to show us how vulnerable we really are. When Omar Bradley warned that "Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants," he had no clue how well his comments would one day apply to extremist groups with a vendetta against us. If they get their hands on a nuclear weapon, the next time they attack us, there won't be two collapsing towers, there'll be a giant mushroom cloud.
So why Iraq, then, and why now? This is where the Greens are not just misguided, but factually wrong. In one recent handout, they claim that "far from simply not complying, Iraq had complied with most of what had been asked of it." Nothing could be further from the truth, and the basis for this claim is truly mystifying. Iraq routinely deceived weapons inspectors, causing Chief Weapons Inspector Richard Butler to resign in disgust.
Even worse, for the past four years there have been no inspections at all. None. Iraq simply kicked the United Nations out while the world watched and did nothing. Several key defectors, including members of Hussein's family and the former head of Iraqi weapons development, confirm that Iraq has aggressively pursued nuclear weapons for years and is on the verge of succeeding. To say that Iraq is "complying" is an atrocious distortion of facts. That Saddam Hussein has now offered to let inspectors back in doesn't mean he's had a change of heart, it means that either he has learned to cover his tracks or he knows we won't accept his lame offer.
Make no mistake, Iraq's intentions are not benign; Hussein is trying to destroy us. He is a coward -- he wants nothing more than to beat us, but he knows he has no chance in a conventional fight. Instead, he has engaged in a proxy war against us, striking back, but rarely openly. For example, Hussein masterminded the attempted assassination of the elder President Bush. Think about that, let that sink in. Saddam Hussein nearly assassinated an American President.
Nor is he averse to having others do his dirty work. We know that Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence officers several times leading up to Sept. 11. We know that Saddam maintains an airplane-hijacking school in the suburbs of Baghdad. We know that he publicly rejoiced on Sept. 11. And we know that he has said time and again that he wants to destroy us. Sure, he's not holding the smoking gun -- he just handed it to someone else.
Let me make this abundantly clear: If Hussein gets nuclear weapons, he will use them against American cities. If Osama bin Laden offers a means of delivery, is there really any doubt that Iraq would take him up on it? Hussein isn't just at odds with the United States, he's a homicidal psychopath. After invading Kuwait and massacring its civilians, he lit its oil wells on fire, launched indiscriminate Scuds at civilian populations in Israel and then engaged in the worst Middle-Eastern genocide since the Turks slaughtered the Armenians. This genocide, however, was against his own people. For his sons' 13th birthdays, he let them shoot their very first political prisoners. Nuclear weapons must be kept out of this man's hands at all costs.
Those who read "Mein Kampf" today wonder how the Allies could ever have let Hitler rearm, and the historical blame lands on Neville Chamberlain -- with all his good intentions -- for having allowed it to happen. Hussein's writing is also on the wall -- if we are so short-sided as to allow him to gain nuclear weapons, the blood will be on our hands.
We can stop it now; it is only a matter of having the courage to do so. At the height of his power, it took us one week followed by five more weeks of cleanup. Knocking out his regime again won't be hard. The instant he gets nuclear weapons, though, this will change. This is not the time to be warm and fuzzy, it's the time to make sure that we don't wake up one morning to find that L.A. or New York or Chicago has been nuked. The situation is worsening every day, and the sooner we act against Iraq the better off we will be.
