by James Lynne

Created on: August 11, 2009   Last Updated: August 20, 2009

Both Saddam Hussein and George Bush are war criminals. It isn't "either, or; it's "both, and." It is the job of history to determine whose misdeeds were more criminal, not merely which is the criminal.

Those who argue that Hussein's use of chemical weaponry against his own people and against Iranians during its lengthy war with Iran justified the Bush position, need only study the facts to see the criminality of both leaders.

Hussein posed no threat to the United States. The United Nations weapons inspectors repeatedly and emphatically reported there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq immediately prior to the Baghdad invasion. Unfortunately, when a path has already been decided, facts only get in the way. So it was with the Bush decision to invade Iraq.

Once it was determined there actually were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the reason for the US invasion was carefully and craftily shifted by the Bush administration to, "Saddam Hussein was an evil despot who needed to be removed from office for crimes against his own people." It is indisputable that Hussein was a cruel despot, but was it the responsibility of George Bush to remove him from power?

In doing so, the United States rained destruction and death upon thousands of innocent people. Nearly five thousand US soldiers and over 200,000 Iraqis were killed in the violence of removing Hussein from office, not to mention the economic loss to both countries.

Hussein's murderous attacks against opposition are well documented. It is no doubt that he took a brutal stance against anyone who questioned his authority. The prevailing question that observers must ask, though, is what business was that of the United States? The continents of the world are beleaguered with murderous regimes whose practices obliterate opposition through violence.

Is the United States taking the position that it is our duty to rid the world of murderous despots? If so, why have we avoided regimes on the African Continent? The answer is clear. That was not the reason we attacked Iraq.

Bush's claim that God led him to the decision to attack Baghdad is equivalent to the actions of the Arab pilots who flew hijacked planes into the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11. Both decisions were motivated by misguided faith, and misguided religion, but are still criminal. The attacks on the World Trade Center Buildings in New York and the bombing of Baghdad are only connected through the concept of religious faith.

In both

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>