On Politics

I did. And so did the Arab world. And Europe saw them, too. Theimages we saw were those of the light of freedom once again winningover the darkness of totalitarianism and fascism. I wondered ifArab citizens watched like the people of the former Soviet Unionand its "satellites" watched as the Berlin wall fell.

After decades of being held hostage in the bloody grip of SaddamHussein, Iraqis lashed out at the omnipresent symbol of theiroppression.

There were the images of the old man holding a picture of Saddamdressed in army fatigues and glasses, slapping the dictator's facewith his sandals, a true Arab symbol of disrespect. There was themuscular Iraqi man smashing a 40-foot statue of Saddam, growingstronger, it seemed, with every blow he inflicted. Finally, anarmored vehicle moved in and a soldier draped an iron chain aroundthe iron effigy of the dictator. An American -- and then veryquickly an Iraqi -- flag was placed over the tyrants face. Thestatue started to come down, withstood the force momentarily, muchlike Hussein against the coalition, before finally crashing to theground. Hundreds of Iraqis rushed in and tore the statue to pieces.They drug the pieces through the streets. Everywhere there wereimages of Iraqis clapping, singing, kissing troops, lootinggovernment buildings and celebrating wildly. In nearly everysection of liberated Iraq people are celebrating.

It was basically everything freedom-loving people love to see.And it was, apparently, everything the "peace" protestors hate tosee.

Shortly after those images of freedom were broadcast around theworld, here, in the nation's capital, I received an e-mail updatefrom International ANSWER, the communist organization that has beenleading large "peace" protests, announcing they were holding amarch on Washington to "stop the war."

Well, I guess they preferred the images of hundreds of thousandsof dead Kurdish villagers. Or maybe they preferred the images ofthe rape of Kuwait. No, I know what images they liked. They warmedto the images free Iraqis produced, after they had ventured intothe once feared buildings of the secret police, of relatives whowere murdered by Saddam's enforcers.

I am not saying this war has been bloodless. None are. InnocentIraqi men, women and children have died. But how many have diedunder Saddam's rule? How many more would have died had he continuedto wield power? How many more would have died under the rule of hissons?

I am not saying the war is over. It isn't. There are still many,many tough battles to be fought. Rebuilding will be difficult andexpensive, both in blood and treasure.

But it was a good day for the coalition--and it was even betterfor the people of Iraq.

It was, however, a bad day for the "peace" protestors.

In announcing their "peace" march, the protestors don't soundanti-war--they seem anti-Iraqi.

They are dutifully playing the role of Saddam's apologists. The"peace" protestors, if they had it their way, would leave Saddam inpower.

According to a report from the San Francisco Chronicle, a numberof human shields, the "useful idiots" who stationed themselvesaround Baghdad to prevent bombing of possible targets, were on handto watch the Iraqis destroy the statue of Saddam. Did they help theIraqis tear down the statue? Did they share in the Iraqi'shappiness? No, they didn't. Instead, "they chastised the Marinesfor attacking Iraq and promoting war."

I am wondering now who the anti-war activists remind me of.

I think it is the Iraqi "Information Minister" who said the"elite" Republican Guard had "crushed" American forces at the newlyrenamed Baghdad International Airport while cable networks showedpictures of a huge American cargo plane landing there. For theprotestors, too, seem to not be able to see what is right there infront of them. In this case joyous, free Iraqi people.

Or, in the future, will they remind us all of the Iraqiambassador to the United Nations, Muhammad Al-Douri, who said lateTuesday afternoon: "I have no relationship with Saddam."?