DesperatelyObvious.com

Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death for crimes he committed in 1982. It is instructive to count how many times the Western press mentions how the United States felt about Iraq in 1982. They must have thought Hussein was on the right track in February of that year when the U.S. officially removed Iraq from their list of states supporting international terrorism. This freed up legal constraints allowing the U.S. to pour money into the state. The U.S. cleared up any doubts that they might be unhappy about Saddam’s massacre of 148 villagers (the crime for which he will be hanged) when Rumsfeld visited Hussein in 1983 to express the friendship between the two countries.

Hussein is also currently on trial for killing thousands of Iraqi Kurds in 1988 with chemical weapons. The New York Times apparently does not find it relevant that this attack was launched from U.S. helicopters sold to Iraq in 1983. The Western Press is so committed to power that they do not even consider mentioning America’s failure to condemn Iraq after the massacre. Because of these constraints on thought and press in a free society, George Bush I will likely never stand trial for continuing to increase economic aid to the country after the 1988 attack.

According to prevailing doctrine the United States could never be found guilty of the types of crimes that Saddam Hussein committed. The liberal press is quick to point our crimes but they are always ones of misplaced idealism or poor execution. For example, John Kerry rails on Bush for failing to do “his homework” and recklessly putting our soldiers into danger without studying the facts beforehand. Imagine the ensuing outrage if he had described Hussein’s crimes as simply poor planning and reckless execution. The outrage would be justified, but the same outrage is deserved for one who fails to condemn Bush for war crimes but instead laments over strategic shortcomings.

As demonstrated, America’s morality is extended to our allies but can at anytime be revoked or rewritten. In the 1980’s, Saddam Hussein was OK because he helped us achieve our selfless goal of curbing Islamic radicalism. A professional does not discuss the idea that U.S. allies such as Israel may be guilty of the “supreme” war crime of aggression. And a respected journalist does not even think about war crimes committed directly by the United States.

Only once U.S. crimes can enter the realm of discussion, can we begin to put an end to the atrocities that we carry out and support.