Yesterday, former UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix described the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as a “pure failure” that left the country worse off than under the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein.
Mr. Blix said the situation would have been better if the war had not taken place.
“Saddam would still have been sitting in office. OK, that is negative and it would not have been joyful for the Iraqi people. But what we have gotten is undoubtedly worse,” he was quoted as saying.
Feeding right into the eager embrace of the liberal press and providing new fodder for the upcoming November elections.
Genocide is not joyful, but capturing Hussein was worse.
And how much worse could it have gotten under Hussein? Mass graves are still being excavated, and according to the Documental Center for Human Rights in Iraq, estimated counts of civilian executions lie around 600,000, during his regime.
That is just the number of executions. Now, what about the tortures?
In 2001, Amnesty International released a report outlining the Hussein regime's legacy of torture. This report stated "methods of torture include extinguishing of cigarettes on various parts of the body, extraction of finger nails and toenails and piercing of the hands with an electric drill. Some have been sexually abused and others have had objects, including broken bottles, forced into their anus. In addition to physical torture, detainees have been threatened with rape and subjected to mock executions."
and let's not forget about the plastic shredders . . .
What an absolutely irresponsible and utterly dumb statement to make, especially for Blix, who one would think might know better, no matter what argument anyone may have about the validity of the war in Iraq. Too bad this sort of backwards thinking could greatly affect us all in 2 weeks.