Yes, I agree completely about the comparison to Hitler, and I've made similar comparisons in several prior topics here.
Saddam's Republican Guard are comparable to Hitler's SS: A personal guard set apart from the regular army that were fiercely loyal exclusively to Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party. The Republican Guard also oversaw capture, torture and execution of undesireable racial and political minorities within Saddam-ruled Iraq, and a covert program to hide and secretly develop weapons of mass destruction, and test them on political and military prisoners.
The Saddam Fedayeen, hiding among the Iraqi population in Iraq's cities, could be compared to Hitler's Brownshirts, bullying locals into obeying the Saddam government.
Saddam Hussein also had dreams of militarily unifying the entire Middle East under his leadership, in a Muslim empire. It is clear this was his motivation in amassing a large military, and weapons of mass destruction.
~
An article I saw today, by Christian author/commentator Hal Lindsey, cuts to the bone of the motivations of France, and also of Germany and Russia, and of the world press, in their lack of support of the U.S. police action in Iraq.
France, Germany and Russia have been violating sanctions all along, and have political and economic interests, and arms sales, that will be interrupted --and brought to light-- by liberation of Iraq.
And global press coverage, is not so much anti-war as anti-American. The world press seems to somehow downplay, or not cover at all, the humanitarian side of the U.S./Coalition effort to liberate and democratize Iraq.
Instead of focusing on how FEW Iraqi civilians were killed, and the efforts to avoid civilian casualties, the global press focuses on graphic footage of the few who were injured, without putting the images in the context of how few were actually killed, how much U.S. forces struggled to avoid civilian (and Iraqi military) deaths. And most importantly, how many of these deaths were
caused NOT by U.S. forces, but by Iraqi military forces, intentionally. They gave Iraqi soldiers every conceivable opportunity to surrender, and avoid bloodshed.
The article:
quote:
________________________________________
FREEDOM ARRIVES WITH U.S. MARINES
Posted: April 10, 2003
by Hal Lindsey
The images were stunning – U.S. Marines rolled into Baghdad virtually unopposed.
While U.S. Marines mingled with jubilant Iraqis, another group of Iraqis set about trying to topple a massive statue of Saddam Hussein.
They set up a ladder, climbed the 30 or so feet to the base of the massive pedestal as the crowd below set up a rope.
The cameras captured the highly symbolic scene of Saddam Hussein, with a noose around his neck, with hordes of freshly liberated Baghdad residents pulling on the other end.
As the coalition rumbled across Iraq, the media pointed to the unexpectedly fierce resistance put up by Iraqi forces as proof the United States was being greeted as the ruthless invading crusaders the media said it was, rather than the liberating force Washington repeatedly said it was.
But as each town fell, the resistance evaporated. Many of the battlefield survivors joined the crowds cheering the columns of Marines before surrendering to the troops bringing up the rear.
That's when we learned the reason for the resistance. Saddam's forces rounded up wives and children of Iraqi men conscripted to the battle. They were told that if they surrendered or were captured, their families would be killed. U.S. forces were baffled by waves of suicide attacks in which men driving Toyota pickups would simply drive into the sides of Bradley fighting vehicles, knowing they could not possibly damage them.
Those "defenders" were not "attacking" the Americans – they were simply dying in battle to save their families. Once the Marines liberated their families, so ended the resistance.
Still, opposition to the war continues, but it grows increasingly obvious that the opposition isn't to the war itself, but to the United States. Nobody is going to march under banners decrying the "invasion of Iraq" anymore.
On Fox News, on Wednesday, cameras caught Iraqis carrying a banner of their own, reading, "Human Shields Go Home."
They can't argue "no blood for oil" anymore. It is obvious to any thinking person that this war was conducted with the least amount of unnecessary bloodshed of any war in human history.
U.S. weapons designers developed a precision guided 2,000-pound block of cement that it used to take out tanks and armored vehicles in urban areas in order to prevent collateral damage.
Blood? Not much, apart from that of the enemy during combat.
The anti-war argument, that Washington waged this war to benefit its economic allies, is pitifully transparent. America is the richest nation in the world. If all we wanted was cheaper oil, we could have simply lifted restrictions on Iraq's oil exports until it was as cheap as we wanted it to be.
The French, German and Russian argument that America abandoned diplomacy just when the inspections were starting to work collapsed as soon as the war began.
U.S. and British forces have uncovered more evidence of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction in three weeks than the U.N. inspection regimes have in 13 years.
Thousands of chemical suits and atropine injectors of German manufacture. Thousands of French radios at Iraqi command posts like the one in the hospital where Pfc. Lynch was rescued. Huge caches of French, Russian and Jordanian weapons discovered at a huge PLO training camp inside Iraq.
Diplomacy and inspections would not have worked, but it would have allowed Saddam to stay in power – and for the lucrative black-market trade to continue.
This war wasn't about benefiting George Bush's economic friends. Continuing U.N. sanctions and allowing the woefully incompetent Hans Blix to oversee weapons inspections were all about benefiting Saddam's Russian, French and German friends – not about the Iraqis.
The real beneficiaries of the war were seen flocking to downtown Baghdad tugging on the noose around the neck of Saddam's statue.
______________________________________
Hal Lindsey is the best-selling author of 20 books, including Late Great Planet Earth. He writes this weekly column exclusively for WorldNetDaily.
Be sure to visit his website where he provides up-to-the-minute analysis of today's world events in the light of biblical prophecies.
