e-Claire

Questions

This story brings up the most poignant and most difficult question arising out of Iraq. To whom do we grant forgiveness and how do we *really* know what was done by whom? The tougher part of the question lies in what someone could have done, but didn't.

How much allowance shall we give for the danger any individual would have brought to himself and his family by saying, "stop" to Saddam's Sadists? How do we decide how much benefit of the doubt is *right?* No one could really know what they, themselves, would have done in that situation. It is impossible to judge what effects the trauma of living under those circumstances might have on an individual psyche.

It's no good to say, "I would have shot the bastards while they slept!" or "I wouldn't let anyone take my family members away to be tortured!" It is not the same as if someone were to come to your door today and try that. Iraq didn't start out in the same shape as it was when the Marines rolled into Baghdad. The weirdness began slowly, as do all tyrannies, with things that might sound reasonable at first, and things that are, somehow, easy to justify - like keeping citizens in jail without the aid of attorneys or arraignment if they are suspected of being terrorists. Might sound reasonable - terrorists are *bad people* after all. So what do we do about Sajida, Raghad, and Rana, and their 10 children? (We being defined here as The Coalition of the Willing) Saddam's ex-wife and daughters weren't consulted about his policies and activities, I'll warrant. I'm pretty sure they weren't consulted before Saddam, or the Brothers Grim, had Raghad and Rana's husbands shot (and who knows, or wants to know, what else) for pissing off Uday trying to run away to Jordan. Maybe they were. Maybe they are Udays in drag. How do we know for sure? Knowing we can't know *for sure* how do we determine what is right for us to do? Do we judge on the basis of their likelihood to ever hurt anyone again? Do we go with the "bad seed" principle and kill any fruit of Saddam's loins, no matter how removed? Do we pat them down for WMDs and let them try to live a normal life in Leeds? (Though even that will be pretty tough once word gets out.)

1. When you run with a gang, you are part of a gang.  They lived their lives of luxury.

   What about the other women - the ones who are too poor to be able to ask for asylum?  If we let in the three women, we must let in all women who
   seek asylum.

   I am always surprised how we go over to defend the poor and downtrodden and bring home the elite.

   So when these three create a good, healthy women’s movement in Iraq, tell them to check back with us.

   Posted by  on  06/07/03  at  05:41 AM

<< Back to main