| Article Overview:
When Saddam Hussein agrees to crush his missiles, does that mean he's
really surrendered his will to the the United Nations, or he's just
buying more time in hopes America's allies will scamper away and leave
the U.S. alone and naked in the world? What is more
important, Saddam's removal of Weapons of Mass Destruction, or the
emasculation of America by European allies? Maybe
it's time for Mr. Rogers to negotiate the War on Terrorism!
2, 2003—Ground Zero Plus 536
Crushing Al Samoud 2 Missiles...
...The Straw That Broke America's
Editor, New York City Combat Correspondent News
GROUND ZERO, New York City, Mar. 2--Imagine
It! Crushing four Al Samoud 2 missiles with bulldozers in a beat-up
arms junkyard in a desolate sand hill in Iraq might be the straw that
breaks the camel's back--or, put another way, the missiles that break
America's "go-to-war" back.
Saddam Hussein may have just pulled another ace out of his
Butcher of Baghdad sleeve by playing his
"pretend-to-crush-the-missiles" trump card.
In a last ditch effort to keep the U.N. Security Council appeased
he is “bending to its will,” Saddam rolled out four battered, off-line
Al Samoud 2 missiles into a chunk of empty sand and played destruction
derby with them yesterday. Bulldozers s-l-o-w-l-y
smashed them, taking their time as the war clock ticked.
gives America the 'raspberry' as U.S. power comes under heavy
attack by former allies.
His “efforts to disarm” were expertly timed. They were just enough
for Turkey's Parliament to vote down a U.S. proposal to use the Middle
East democratic nation as a launch pad for a Northern assault on
Iraq. Shocking Turkey's leaders, and devastating American diplomats
who have pressed Turkey for the right to use its bases in a war
against Iraq, the Middle East's first democracy shouted NO WAR
FOR OIL! to the U.S.
Months of negotiations had ended with the U.S. offering billions of
dollars in aid to cash-strapped Turkey in return for using its bases
and airspace. Up to 60,000 U.S. troops were slated to attack Iraq
from this strategic vista.
With egg on its face, the U.S. is now scrambling to find
alternatives to launch a swift and decisive attack on Iraq, should war
And what does Saddam Hussein think? Well, you can bet he is
gleefully picking his teeth with miniature Al Samoud 2 missile
toothpicks, happy that his choice to destroy them was just enough
disarmament bluff to cause the Turkey vote to swing against the U.S.
Ababil 100 and
Al Samoud 2 missiles in construction
Turkey delivered may devastate American efforts to convince other
wavering nations that war is the only solution unless Saddam Hussein
steps down or a revolt within his ranks topples his regime.
In effect, the Beast of Terror has won another major but
important battle in proving how nations will embrace (ignore?)
Terrorism until it spills the blood of their children.
Turkey has now joined France, Germany and Russia in a major
stand-off against the U.S. and Britain, the two major nations calling
for immediate action against Saddam Hussein. Each in its own way is
thumbing its nose at the U.S. "Iraq war policy," while Saddam Hussein
dances in the palaces in Baghdad.
To the casual observer, if any can exist in this turmoil of
nations at war with the egos of other nations, the idea of Saddam
gaining a reprieve for bulldozing a few missiles seems as idiotic as
his pledge never to torture another citizen.
To Hussein, what's a couple of old missiles?
Of the estimated 100-200 Al Samoud 2 missiles in his
country (new sources seem to waffle on the exact number, some saying
100, others quoting 150, still others hedging with 100-200) smashing
four seems a small sacrifice. Odds are the four chosen were the
oldest, most beat up and probably non-functioning of all.
Imagine you were Saddam. Would you rush to destroy all your
missiles? Like a football coach eating up the play clock, you'd take
your time and grind up the inefficient, most crippled of them as
slowly as possible. Your delay in acting would evoke the Chinese
Water Torture, where a single drop of water pounding over and over
eventually eats a giant hole in the rock below. You’d know that if
you kept the carrot on the stick that you were moving toward
disarmament, that eventually the U.S. allies would drop like flies.
And they are. One by one, the nations the U.S. has historically
counted on to back its decisions are turning coats. Some are lifting
their leg. Others are planning to exclude the U.S. and to take over
Iraq on non-U.S. terms.
has a lot more cards up his sleeve than just taking his time to crush
a few missiles. In addition to the Al Samoud 2’s, there's the 385
SA-2 rocket engines that power the missiles. Most of the engines
have been illegally imported into Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War. They
are also slated for disposal. But, there’s a nagging question raised
by the number of engines—why 385 if there are only 100 or 200
missiles? At the most conservative basis, that’s one engine for
every four missiles, and at the top of the line, a two-to-one ratio.
Could Saddam either have more than 200 missiles, maybe some
buried in the deep sand?
Maybe Saddam owes his good fortune to escape sanctioned war
against him not to Turkey, France, Germany or Russia, but mostly to
the U.S. political and diplomatic corps that has been bungling
negotiations and public relations to win support for unseating Saddam.
Perricos, deputy weapons inspector, driven from military district
where missiles were being destroyed
news suggests that U.S. diplomacy has been similar to television character
Andy Sipowicz (played by Dennis Franz) interrogating a suspect on
N.Y.P.D. Blue--less than tactful.
Critics of U.S. diplomacy say America is shoving its power
and might down the throats of former allies who don't leap up to the
table and buy-in on American "war-against-Saddam-at-all-costs"
policy. CNN reports one Turkish official stating the “U.S.
negotiations were disgusting,” The Turkish Parliament's vote against
allowing U.S. troops to use its country as a launch pad was, CNN said,
largely a reaction to being "bullied." So much for Andy Sipowicz
smashing telephone books against the back of suspect's heads.
But what does all this mean to my grandsons, Matt, age 6;
Angus age 8 months, or my granddaughter, Sarah, 4?
That's the core issue. And it should be for every parent in
America, France, Germany, Russia, Turkey and the other 185 nations of
Will U.S. fumbling of foreign policy and its arrogance to
unseat Saddam backfire and leave the Beast of Terror to roam the sands
of Iraq with impunity? Will that impunity seep through the sifting
sands of Iraq upon my grandchildren, or any other’s children or
Will Saddam be
free to roam the sands with impunity?
the world’s reaction to American Anti-Terrorist policy of hunting down
and eliminating threats that present clear and present dangers to the
present and future of the children, one would think that only America
sees Terrorism for what it is--a cancer that needs to be cut out
before it spreads. But the rest of the world isn't looking at
surgery. Instead, it seems bent on chemotherapy--destroy a few
missiles here, let a few more inspectors in, allow a couple of private
It seems the world has turned the blind eye toward Saddam
Hussein’s flagrant acts of deception regarding an open book look at
his weapons of mass destruction. Personal honesty is one of the key
cogs in the disarmament wheel everyone is ignoring.
So far, Iraq has refused the 28 private interviews requested by
U.N. inspectors with scientists working in the biochemical weapons of
mass destruction field.
me wonder why the U.S. didn't demand that Iraq allow the scientists to
be privately interviewed rather than seeking to destroy limited range
missiles (they exceed U.N. restrictions by having a range of only a
few miles over the maximum allowed) and have no guidance systems. The
missiles enjoy the accuracy of a rock being hurled into the air. One
might think the missiles are only a headline diversion, swerving world
opinion away from the nitty gritty and that no one really wants to put
Saddam Hussein's feet to the fire.
find the good stuff"
Twenty-eight refusals to interview scientists? If one has something
to hide, you cut off his tongue. In effect, Saddam has let the world
know none of his scientists will be allowed to talk, and, rumor has it
if any do, their families will be killed. That's pretty good tongue
cutting in my book.
Missiles or tongues?
Show or go?
I get dizzy thinking "Why do nations bury their heads and turn
on each other when the enemy of them all stands guilty and ready to
act against all who oppose him??
Every bone in my Vigilant body wants
to insure my grandchildren's safety, and the safety of their
grandchildren, and their grandchildren's safety.
Then I look at the world.
Instead of seeing a unified front against the Beast of Terror, I see a
pie carved into many pieces and those around the table fighting for
I see one Beast of Terror dancing around
his maypole, happy as a clam that he is slowly castrating the U.S.
power position. Part of his success due to "suck-up" politics,
where one nation makes a deal with another to turn against another,
all once allies, now conspiring to divide themselves up so no one is
stronger than the other. They become the enemy. They
forget that if you swim with the sharks and think you can't be
bitten to death by the ducks surrounding the shark pool, you are
sorely mistaken. Saddam is gnawing on them.
France along with its pal Germany is trying to belittle the Power
of America and gain their own Power over Iraq.
effeminate nations such as France, with literally no geopolitical
clout except long-winded rhetoric, are
crippling the U.S. when it least expected it. Nations such as
Turkey the U.S. tried to buy off with billions of dollars of blackmail
financial aid have turned at the last minute and tossed back the
dollars as though the bills were washed with the blood of the innocent
and America was some "hit man" trying to assassinate "good" so "evil"
Then there is Germany, the nation America
conquered and set free. It stands out like a sore thumb against
war--one of the most aggressive of all nations in Europe--refusing to
lend a hand in favor of U.S. policy.
And Russia. Well, no one expects
Russia to rush to any side. But it leans toward Europe and
casts it lot with France and Germany, and now Turkey.
Can these nations be called Vigilant?
Do they really believe that Saddam
Hussein's bulldozing tactics suggest any concert toward disarmament?
Obviously, they aren't that naive.
So, they must be plotting to
unseat America's power base in Europe and the Middle East.
They must want to emasculate America's might, to shame it before the
world, to cast it adrift on the turbulent seas of Imperialism where
all its former friends will offer it drinks of salt water and shout,
"The King is Dead, Long Live the King!"
But who is the new King?
"The King is
dead! Long live the new King (Saddam)"
It's got to be the Beast of Terror. He's
won another battle, because he's turned the heads of the Vigilant away
from himself, and successfully made the Sheriff of Vigilance the "bad
It's America who is being protested globally as
the warmonger, not Saddam Hussein, or Kim Jong Il, or Osama bin Laden.
Odd? Peculiar? Frustrating.
Is the way of the world to turn against the
Terror Hunter? It would seem so.
I want to tell my grand kids what's
happening in the world, that the bad guys have made the good guys the
bad guys, and that the former good guys of the good guys have turned
into bad guys because they don't like the good guy anymore and want
him to go away, and now the former good guys are bad guys, but not as
bad as the original bad guy who is being presented as a good guy for
crushing his missiles, but is not good enough of a guy to let anyone
interview his scientists who might tell the world the bad guy really
isn't a good guy disguised as a bad guy, but really a bad, bad, bad
guy who might be disguised as a bad guy but really is the Beast of
Even that confuses me.
Then I would have to explain why
France, once a good guy turned into a bad guy but the world thinks it
now the leader of the good guys, and then do the same with Germany,
and ultimately try to explain about Turkey.
Along each step of the way, Matt, the
six-year-old, would pound me with the eternal Vigilant question: "Why
would they do that, G-Pa?"
And, while I might have some answers,
I don't know if I'd have the strength to conjure them all.
But I do know that Terrorism isn't
just about Saddam Hussein.
Terrorism is all about selfishness.
It's about when nations and leaders
are more concerned with themselves than they are future generations of
all the children.
Tony Blair enjoys a
vision of the future where his children and the
Children's Children's Children
of the world are free of the Beast
I know the
U.S. is much at fault in this area. Had it professed the purpose
of disarming Iraq for the benefit of the Children's Children's
Children and stuck to that single-minded message, and cleared the
table of all other issues but that as the bulls eye of diplomacy, then Turkey would have voted in
What Turkish Parliament saw was a bunch of
U.S. politicians strong-arming them, trying to drive them to buy their
will. The negotiators used bully tactics, not Generational
Safety Tactics, and that cost America credibility.
There was no vision to the future in the
negotiations, for had there been, our diplomats would be talking
constantly about the safety of the Children's Children's Children, and
how Saddam was endangering the future of the Turkish Children, the
French Children, The German Children, and the Russian Children.
We should have sent Fred Rogers of
Rogers Neighborhood to negotiate, for he would have inspired rather
than alienated the public to stand up for what is right, rather than
to concede to Fear, Intimidation and Complacency, the tools of
Fred Rogers would have said: "Every
child has the right to be special. Saddam Hussein
restricts the right of the child to be special. For that reason,
he is a Terrorist. For that reason, he must be deposed."
Who could argue with Mr. Rogers?
No parent would.
But when George Bush wags his finger into
people's faces, and growls, the kids watching him don't see a Sentinel
of Vigilance wanting to make their neighborhood's safe, they see a
"monster" challenging them.
There will be Vigilance in Mr. Roger's Neighborhood
Theoretically, nations should see through
personalities to the intent they represent. But people don't.
People take threats and muscle as Bullyism, and bullies can't live
comfortably in Mr. Rogers Neighborhood, but friends can.
So, I ended up telling my grandson
that one day the world will be like Mr. Rogers Neighborhood. It
will be free of people who threaten and bully other people, because
everyone will be more concerned with the Children's Children's
Children than themselves.
Then he looked at me and said, "When
will that be, G-Pa?"
And I replied: "When everyone becomes
a Parent of Vigilance!"
The Children Of America Want To Go To War
- 2004, VigilanceVoice.com, All rights reserved -