Imagine. A debate
between Saddam Hussein and George Bush? That would be something, although it
certainly won't happen.
Saddam Hussein made
his challenge during an exclusive interview with CBS anchor Dan Rather in
Baghdad, and Bush quickly responded "No" through his spokesman, Ari
Fleischer.
"I
am ready to conduct a direct dialogue - a debate - with your president,'' CBS
quoted Saddam as saying. "I will say what I want and he will say what he
wants.''
In the CBS interview
Saddam challenged Bush to a televised debate via satellite linkup, along the
lines of those in a U.S. presidential campaign, the network said.
"This is not about
public relations. This is about protecting the lives of the American people,''
Fleischer said. "If Saddam Hussein destroys the missiles that he said he never
had ... you've got to wonder what other weapons does he have?''
Talk about two sides
that lie. The idea of a debate is a joke, alright.
Both George Bush and
Saddam Hussein have something to gain from this little charade. Iraq's tyrant is
appealing to anti-war sentiment in the rest of the world. Everyone knows that
this war isn't so much about weapons of mass destruction as it is about control
of oil, and Bush avenging his father who lives in humiliation everyday that
Saddam Hussein remains in power.
In the past several
months, the Bush friendly oil companies have pushed the price of gasoline so
high that we are soon to break new records. People are under the misconception
that higher oil prices means profits and new jobs, but they don't.
The oil companies are
salivating knowing that war with Iraq will give them the cover they need to push
prices even higher to increase their own profits. They can't wait to get their
hands on Iraq's oil fields.
We can't have that
come out in a debate.
Secondly, Bush keeps
saying he has evidence Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, but it is clear to
everyone that claim is just not true. Colin Powell's presentation to the United
Nations failed to move anyone, except those rightwing fanatics in the United
States who are driving talk radio histrionics. Radio demagogues like Sean
Hannity continue to rally the war cries of hatred, managing to mix in his usual
race-based views and stereotyping to skip over discussion about
"facts" and "proof."
Ads by Google:
Advertisements not controlled by IslamiCity
|
And there are other embarrassing
questions Bush does not want to answer, especially from a tyrant like Saddam
Hussein who wears the stamp "Made in the U.S." on his bloodied
history.
What would Bush say
if Saddam Hussein asked him to tell people what evidence he has that Iraq
possesses weapons of mass destruction?
What would Bush say
if Saddam Hussein asked him to explain how the United States supplied him with
much of the poison gas and chemical technology that we now claim exists?
What would Bush say
if Saddam Hussein accuses Bush of allowing him to launch a war against Iran, where
most of the civilian atrocities were committed?
Bush doesn't need to
debate because a debate does him no good. In fact, a public debate is exactly
what you don't want when your entire case is based on emotion, demagoguery and
fanning the flames of public fear, as the Director of Homeland Security is
helping to do these days.
This country is
facing a threat from terrorists and we are in a war we haven't and can't even
seem to win in Afghanistan. Everyday, we are reminded the terrorists are out
there and if it weren't for Saddam Hussein, Bush would have nothing to distract
us from that fact that we have failed to finish that war on terrorism and might
never finish it.
And, there's nothing
better to distract Americans from the other big failure, our down-spiraling
economy and the president's inability to make it right.
The issue of a debate
is a joke, alright. But the joke is not simply about Saddam Hussein.
Ray Hanania'
writes a twice weekly column on Middle East affairs that is distributed by
Creators Syndicate. Hanania can be reached on the internet at www.hanania.com.