Today is the one year anniversary of the US led invasion of Iraq. None of the doomsayers have been right. There was no bloodbath going in. There was no regional war. US forces were not bogged down or stuck in any quagmire. There has been no refugee crisis. There has not been a Shi'ite uprising.
In fact, mostly the opposite has been true. The war went quickly with historically low casualties on both sides. Baghdad fell ahead of schedule. Today the economy is booming, reconstruction is well advanced, the insurgency is all but defeated and the Iraqis themselves are poised to take over. Well done!
As for opponents of the war, it's come out that many, like the French, were simply bought and paid for. Others like Susan Lindauer weren't really anti-war. They were on the other side. Perhaps most disturbing, though, are the anti-war folks who are still unwilling to concede that the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein in it. We can fathom no rational reason to prefer a world with Saddam. Perhaps, denied a military disaster, they are hoping to create a political one.
Speaking of the irrational, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin
today repeated a common canard:
"Terrorism didn't exist in Iraq before," Le Monde newspaper quoted him as saying. "Today, it is one of the world's principal sources of world terrorism."
Just for the exercise lets parse this claim.
1. Terrorism didn't exist in Iraq: Sure, and terrorism today does not exist in Iran or Syria. That's because they export it. Iraq had also been an exporter of terror. Now it isn't.
2. Iraq is now a principal source of world terrorism: This statement is even more ridiculous than the first. Iraq had been one of the world's principal exporters of terrorism. Now it is ground zero for
fighting terrorism. Terrorists from around the globe have flocked there to fight and be killed by Americans. Far from being a source of terrorism, as it was prior to the war, Iraq has become the principal burial ground for the world's terrorists.
Mr. de Villepin's statement gives the impression that US activities in Iraq have somehow made the world terrorism problem worse. In fact the opposite is true. Invading Iraq did not create new terrorists. It brought existing terrorists out of their various hiding places to Iraq where, according to
StrategyPage, already several thousand have been killed. The few Baathists who remain in Iraq fighting coalition forces are certainly not contributing to world terrorism, though they may very well have been in their official capacities under Saddam.
Contrary to Mr. Villepin's specious claims, the invasion of Iraq has been a dramatic blow to world terrorism. They have lost bases, funding, technical assistance, intelligence assistance and thousands of fighters. At the same time the world has gained a budding new democracy. Why doesn't Mr. Villepin care about that?
Those, like Mr. de Villepin, who refuse to admit that the invasion of Iraq has dealt a body blow to world terror are not people we can trust to fight it. The Spanish elections have proved that the anti-war crowd is not prepared to stand up to terrorists. Instead they will instantly surrender. That, gentle reader, is the difference between Bush and the anti-war crowd. Fight or surrender. Bush made the right call in Iraq, and the world is better off for it.