Some Responses To The

Anti-Antiwar Crowd Crowd

To the Editor:

I want to say thank you to the anti-antiwar crowd crowd for offering enlightenment.

Firstly, to Mr Swift for his insight that “our current president has finally shed…foreign policy by appeasement.” I confess that I have searched in vain for evidence of such a policy. Chile, Cuba, Granada, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Serbia, none of these seem to fit. The closest I come to it is Argentina where there was strong sentiment in the Reagan administration to appease the military dictatorship after they invaded the Falkland Islands.

Secondly, to Mr Gottmeier for his “first hand” account of the treatment of “a woman who protested Saddam’s agenda.” First hand? Do you mean you actually spoke to the woman, or to one of the “Iraq soldiers” who raped, beat, and killed her? I am sorry but absent corroboration this sounds too much like the report by a woman, who turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador, who was not even in Kuwait at the time that she claimed to have witnessed atrocities. Also for telling us that “UN Resolution 1441…call(s) for the use of force to disarm Iraq.” Actually it does not, it refers to “serious consequences,” and that only after the council has determined that a material breach has occurred. And no one who supports this war can possibly “want a peaceful resolution more than anyone can imagine.” I can imagine ensuring that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction without going to war, and so can the French, German, Russian, and Chinese governments, as well as millions of people in Britain, Canada, Australia, USA etc.

Thirdly, to Mr Viola who explained why those imaginary tunnel locations must be kept secret. Of course it only works if you can believe that only one person in Iraq, apart from Hussein, knows the locations. Did it not occur to you that they would be visible to spy satellites? And you are wrong about how 1441 works, it “requests all member states to give full support…by providing any information…and by recommending sites to be inspected.” The US failed to meet its responsibility there. Also for telling us that “[the antiwar crowd] believe everything Saddam says.” As a member of that crowd I can testify that that is a despicable lie. But in the world of Viola, it seems, there are no colors, no nuances, no subtleties, everything is black and white, and blind obedience is required or your name is on the enemies list. He has accused anyone attending “antigovernment rallies” of “aiding and abetting the enemy.” [Note to the editor: Is that the sort of calumny that you had in mind in your editorial of March 21st?] His question, “Is [putting our military in greater jeopardy] what you want?”, is beneath contempt.

Fourthly, to Ms Villafano for her rewrite of history. Unfortunately it is not true that “evidence of [the holocaust] was not forthcoming before our invasion [of Germany].” Evidence of Nazi genocide was available before December 1941, but it was not in US interest to get involved until Japan attacked. If this was a war to prevent genocide I would be supporting it. But of course you have decided that I am not really against the war, I just “hate President Bush.” I do not understand your use of the expression “no matter what.” Nor do I understand how you can intuit what I “can’t truly believe.” But I will tell you what I can and do truly believe –– Bush wants control of Iraq’s oil reserves and military power in the Middle East and will do whatever it takes to get it.

Brian Gibney

10 Checkerberry Lane, Sandy Hook                         March 24, 2003