Let’s not be cowards!

God, I love Pierre Foglia. He speaks as if he read my mind and I’m going to take the liberty to translate his last article in La Presse. Then, I’m going to be brave and send him an e-mail to tell him how much I admire him for speaking the voice of many!

LET’S NOT BE COWARDS – by Pierre Foglia © La Presse

I read a call to the weapons in the National Post this weekend… Let’s see… I think I’m starting it all wrong, it was in French, thus it could not be in the Post, it was in Le Devoir, excuse me. I start again. I read in Le Devoir of Saturday the chronicle of a lady who said that it was necessary to make the war with Saddam. And why should it be done? Because, explained the lady, it would be coward not to do it. Quite simply. Translated in the language of the barracks: Let’s show Saddam that we have the balls.

It is not to a lady of her age and her experience who I will explain that those balls are like ideas: we can have some without them being ours. Those precisely, are the sabre-rattler right-wing ideas, and the balls of the flower-with-rifle philosophers since September 11. During all times the right has made of cowardice a psychopathology, and even a hysteria. To negotiate? A cowardice. To temporize? A cowardice. All is dishonorable, except war.

And to sigh all together: Ah, if we had shown more firmness with Hitler!

Should we be reminded that Hitler had an ideological project and a formidable machine of war to apply it? Saddam does not have an ideological project, he does not have a religion, he is not even Muslim, this idiot. And especially, he is the head of NO military power, he is not the head of a country that has been under supervision for 10 years, spied by planes 24 hours a day for 10 years, a country famished, bloodless, taken in the strait jacket of the sanctions. A country without navy, without aviation. A country which the Americans and the English have bombed a little bit every-single-day for 10 years. And is this frightening “power” the one that could put the world in such urgent danger that it is necessary to mass 200.000 men at its borders?

Let us be clear. It will not be a match. Before engaging one single soldier on the ground, Americans will bomb, bomb and bomb. They will destroy the remains of Iraq using, as in 1991, shells containing uranium, shells manufactured with their nuclear waste, with a hard radioactivity that lasts a million years… In 1991, the Americans poured over Iraq the equivalent to seven times the power of the atomic bomb of Hiroshima. Destroying the infrastructures, telecommunications, sewers, all. Between 130.000 and 180.000 people dead, 70% were civilian population (Cited in “La Question Irakienne” by Pierre-Jean Luizard, researcher at CNRS and specialist in the history of contemporary Islam).

A cowardice to try to avoid a completely useless war? A war which, after three weeks of bombings, and the thousands and thousands of deaths, will be concluded by the disbanding of the Iraqi army and massive desertions; a war without combatants, just victims? Two hundred and thousand dead for oil?

An enormous machine to crush a goldbeater’s skin that a blow of pin (a coup d’etat) would be enough to deflate?

Two hundred and thousand dead because you are not able to tolerate five more minutes of Saddam, the monster of the monsters who tortures the little children in front of their parents? How many years did you tolerate Pinochet? Bokassa? Amin Dada? Somoza? Trujillo? Stroessner? Not only you tolerated all these, but you installed them, you armed them, you instructed their torturers, the same way you armed and trained Saddam. And you just saw Saddam’s tortures now? Not? You are not serious, he tortures? But this is terrible! Videla-Massela-Galtieri, does that mean something to you? Presidents of Argentina in the 80s. Thirty thousand died, 30.000 arrested at night, academics, trade unionists, you took them along to make helicopter tour above the sea. Splash. No president of the United States ever threatened Videla, nor Galtieri… It is true that they were in the axis which did good to the American interests in the area.

But I get excited for nothing. The war is a certainty. The war has started. Mr. Bush is now fighting his more difficult battle: that of the public opinion. Where the engagement is total. The enthusiastic mobilization of pacifists gives the impression of a hot resistance. In fact, the opposition of the street, the people, is much more tepid, much softer. And it is in this weaknesss where Mr. Bush strikes. In this weakness, next Wednesday, he will insert his famous evidence that the Iraqis hide weapons of massive destruction.

I heard skeptics laugh this morning because this evidence does not exist, that Washington is manufacturing them with haste. The skeptics will be confused. Mr. Bush keeps in his sleeve, since the very beginning, this evidence. It is not significant if it’s manufactured or not. The significant thing, is that you will be shaken. They will show you tricks, things, cans. “Botulinic Acid” will be written on the top, in Arabic. But they will translate for you, do not worry (now that I think, isn’t this evidence the proof that Saddam can hide nothing?). They will tell you the danger of it all in a scene carefully regulated, drum roll and all tralala. Tadam! The moment was chosen a long time ago as having to be the turning point to gain the public opinion. The goal of the operation is to bring millions of people in the world, to say this exactly: “I was a little against the war, but there, really, Saddam exaggerates!”

More than to war itself, the American and international opinion are opposed to an American intervention without the agreement of the United Nations. That will not happen. I wrote it the other day and I persist: France, Russia, Germany will end up joining Bush and Blair. They all together will fill their small can with gasoline in Baghdad. Mr. Chrétien does not say another thing when my colleagues ask if Canada would follow the United States in a unilateral action, don’t ask hypothetical questions, says he, who knows more than you and me what is coming.

Do not ask if there will be the war. It is already happening. Even as you are the objective of the first great battle. Rest reassured, you will not die. We will just deaden you.

4 thoughts on “Let’s not be cowards!

  1. See, I have to agree with that – I don’t think we should go to war just to prove that we can.

    I do think we should go to war to eliminate a regime that funds attacks on the United States; supports terrorist cells around the world; murders, starves and represses it’s own people; hides facts from UN inspectors; threates citizens (and their families) for attempting to cooporate with UN inspectors; considers it a personal mission to “wipe out” wester/democratic governments and peoples around the worls and builds the weapons to do so…

    but not jus to prove a point. :thumb:

  2. How can Iraq fund attacks to the United States if they can’t even fund themselves? Where are the proofs that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with September 11th? And by eliminating such regime you mention, you will also eliminate people who have been suffering under the UN sanctions for many years. Why can’t people understand those sanctions are also killing people, that the resolutions take time, that the food is delayed, that children are dying on the streets of Iraq because of the sanctions rather than because of the regime. The force the U.S. and England will use against Iraq is that of a bully who knows has the power and likes to abuse it.

    From whichever perspective you look at it from, war is despicable, nauseating and those who exert it as a method of justice are not welcome in my heart. But those who are blind thinking that this war is about protecting people and support it… I just feel sorry for them and how much they have let lies to enter their heads. It is easy to support a war when you know you’re not going to be the human shield, that tomorrow you will have food on your table and a T.V. and an internet connection to follow the carnage without being touched. It is easy to support a war when it is not your children the ones who will be killed.

    For those who will come again with how terrorists killed so many on 9/11. I don’t need to be reminded, I know how horrible it was. But this war is not about that… Sadly, it was just the reason the Bushies needed to step on the Middle East countries. Oh how sorry I feel for everyone…

  3. :smile: Thank you so much for translating that article Bea!! It is so clear to Pierre Foglia and even though the translation gets a little lost from French to English it is a wonderful description of exactly what the truth is. I would say 99% of the French-Canadians feel this truth as does probably 90% of the rest of Canadians. If you get a moment, could you send me the link to this article in French for André? Your comments are wonderful as well as very true. The u.s. has had a few casualties but the casualties they have/are inflicting all over the world for as long as history is written are what the rest of the world needs to stand up and take note of. In his dyslexic speach the other night, the little idiot lied to the americans so much. One of the more note-worthy lies was that terrorists give no warning. HELLO!! The u.s. were well-warned about 9/11. They just chose to do nothing.

  4. I agree that war is best avoided, to that end the Nations allied again Iraq (this is not just a US thing) have proposed that Saddam step down and go into exile – The US has even offered to help him find a safe place for himself, his family and his close aide. This solution would benefit everyone, those that want Saddam out of power, those people suffering at his hands within Iraq and those that wish to avoid war… why isn’t anyone arguing for that solution?