The War against the West
Reader comment on item: [Saddam's] WMD Lies

Submitted by Fred Keller (United States), Oct 7, 2003 at 23:41

Professor Pipes,

I have a little over 30 years of experience in living and working in third world countries, six years in Southeast Asia and 25 in Zaire/Congo. I was a private businessman with investments of several million dollars when I was forced out of Zaire/Congo by the Clinton installed Marxist dictator Kabila. We left the country with only the clothes on our backs, leaving behind 2.5 million dollars in investments.

For what it is worth I wrote President Bush urging him to do whatever was necessary to get you on the job, even if it meant going around congress. I truly believe you are the one and only man for the job.

On the Iraq war, I see a different approach than WMD, I suspect that the President used this as an excuse because it was something that the general dumbed down population could understand. The schools in America are doing a great disservice to our country by failing to teach history and world politics.

I see Saddam as someone who imagines himself the reincarnation of Nebuchadnezzar II, the individual who conquered the Middle-East including Jerusalem in ancient times. I suspect that he fostered the idea of his having huge quantities of WMD in order to intimidate his neighbors, in the hopes that one day he could gain control over the whole area using intimidation rather than force of arms, having been slapped down by the U N and the Americans last time he tried make a move in this direction.

Once in control of the entire Middle-East, he could then hold the world hostage to the price of oil. I also see an effort by the French to bring an end to the dominance of the U S Dollar as the world's currency. Two years prior to the war the French had made a deal with Saddam to accept Euros in payment of Iraq's oil. They had also approached Iran with the same proposition and it was under discussion when the war with Iraq began. I suspect, but have no proof that they had approached Saudi and Angola with the same proposition. Had they been successful, the economy of the U S would have collapsed as foreign countries moved to exchange their Dollars for Euros. Thank God it never happened.

If the President had made these facts public, it could have caused a panic in the market and yet further problems on top of the 700 Billion lost as a result of 9/11.

I disagree with the President when he says that this is not a war against Islam. For him it may not be, but certainly to the radical Islamist it is a war against America and the West, being waged by all means from massive immigration in Europe to force of arms and the use of terrorism against the U S. In my view it is a continuance of the war they fought in Europe having been defeated at the gates of Vienna on September 11 1683. The first attack in the modern phase of the continuance of this war was in Tehran in 1979.

I was scheduled to go to Tehran in November of 1979, it was only luck that I didn't wind up there. I keep remembering that Iran was a modern and secular country under the Shah and almost overnight after the Shah was forced out of office by Carter's inaction, it turned into a radical Islamist society. I think much the same thing could happen in Europe if they ever gained majorities in the governments there. The ordinary Muslims who we in the states view as good Muslims who want only to live their lives in peace and prosperity are viewed by these radicals as bad Muslims, given the recent problems at GITMO, one can only guess if they would remain loyal if it came to a choice between the country and their religion.

Hopefully Dr. Kay will find something that can be passed off as WMD; if he is unable to do so, I fear that we will see a repeat of the Bush 41 presidency i.e. a single term president.

B/rgds, Fred Keller

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.