I am SICK of the appeasers crying about us being in Iraq.

“Arrogant? Arrogant? Who is being arrogant?” I find myself bellowing at the Liberal Freaks on the television. Are we really thinking this thing through? The Political Left has proudly joined the chorus of the “offended”! What is their reasoning for calling our President arrogant? Each time you ask them, they squeal about W’s going into Iraq without the approval of the rest of the world. This is the first falsehood.

President Bush did go to the UN. The UN unanimously approved Resolution 1441. Then the Left slanders Bush’s decision to remove a dictator who had refused to comply with over a decade of resolutions issued by the UN. How is this arrogant?

The very purpose of these resolutions is to ensure peace throughout the world. The very need for such resolutions was due to Saddam’s disregard for peace and his invasion into another country in 1990! Now, I ask you, who is arrogant? I say Saddam. Clearly it is Saddam.

Now, let’s go deeper and further! Has anyone read this resolution? I did. It is so easy to understand! This resolution uses the word recalling 7 times, deploring 4 times, and immediate (or immediately) 11 times. Again, I ask, who is arrogant? Who is outright defying the world? Who is threatening world peace? To even suggest that Iraq was not a threat is both wrong and irresponsible.

The very people who accuse our President of defying the UN, and endangering world peace are the very people who have sat by, turning a blind eye, to a dictator who has (1) gassed his own people, (2) engaged in War with its neighbors, (3) tortured and killed anyone in his country that disagrees with him –including children, and (4) literally engaged in class warfare and racism to the extent of starving people for cash.

Oh, it gets better. Saddam’s explanation for invading Kuwait goes as follows. Saddam claimed that “annexing Kuwait had been a religious duty, a jihad, since the al-Sabah family (Kuwait's rulers) had ruled over an artificial state set up by the British. Saddam claimed that his jihad had liberated Kuwait from dominance by "Western infidels.” (see Gilles Kepel, Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2002), 208f.) Does anyone smell the aroma of arrogance here?

Am I the only one who recognizes the word jihad? In light of the events on 9-11, it is imperative that we recognize when someone uses the word jihad to explain war and violence. Saddam was implementing the jihad we are experiencing today, back in 1990! Also, note the word infidels. Once we look at the facts, the fog of rhetoric by the far Left's PR noise machine is blown away.

Senator, and losing Presidential Candidate, John Kerry referred to the Coalition as "Window Dressing" and claimed that they are not sharing the burden of the war and reconstruction. Does this sound like the words we would use to describe Great Britain? Italy? Poland? Japan? Australia?

Kerry calls the war in Iraq a “diversion.” I would call Saddam’s claim that he “liberated Kuwait” the diversion! Kerry also referred to the Coalition as "coerced" And "bribed." (Herbert A. Sample, "Kerry Blasts Bush On Iraq Effort," Sacramento Bee, 3/14/03) It would seem the Senator has never heard of the Oil for Food Scandal.

Who has truly been coerced and bribed? How do you call a group of nations fighting terrorism “coerced” and “bribed,” while you constantly thump your chest about gaining support from nations that refuse to stand-up to Saddam? Particularly when the current leaders of these same do nothing nations are reaping all kinds of benefits from a UN managed program of corruption? Who is being bribed when the various Leftist political leaders accept massive "Oil for Food contracts" that result in denying the very benefits the program was created to provide for the poor people of Iraq?

These are the facts folks:
1 Saddam is a liar.

2 Kuwait was granted full independence in 1961. Iraq formally recognized its border with Kuwait TWICE; once in 1932 (upon Iraq gaining its independence), and again in 1963.

3 On March 31 1990, the Washington Post reported that in May, 1989, U.S. Customs officers had blocked the shipment to Iraq of 185 high-speed capacitors which could have been used to detonate a nuclear bomb.

4 In 1990 Saddam Hussein announced that if Israel attacked Iraq, he would destroy half of Israel with chemical weapons.

5 On July 16, 1990, during an OPEC meeting in Geneva, Saddam threatened military action against Kuwait for exceeding oil production quotas and accused Kuwait of stealing oil by using slant drilling techniques.

6 On July 17, 1990, Saddam threatened force against ANY Arab nation who didn’t abide by their quotas.

7 On July 18, 1990, Saddam amassed 30,000 troops on the Kuwait border

8 On August 1, 1990, Kuwait refused to cancel billions of dollars in Iraq debt, and relinquish any of its territory.

9 On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait.

10 The OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) had been meeting when Saddam invaded Kuwait. The conference voted to condemn the Iraqi invasion and to express its solidarity with Kuwait. Only five members (Iraq, PLO, Jordan, and the Sudan, with Libya abstaining) did not vote for the resolution. This is often looked upon as the beginning of the conflict amongst the Sunni Muslims, which lead to the creation of radical rebels such as Usama Bin Laden.

11 On August 3, 1990, Saddam amassed troops on the Saudi border in the area called the “Neutral Zone.” The UN Security Council voted 14-0 on resolution 660, that demanded Saddam to immediately withdrawal all Iraqi forces.

12 On August 7, 1990, The U.S. began deployment of troops to Saudi Arabia upon the request of King Fahd. (this is one of Bin Laden’s excuses for justifying attacks against Americans anywhere in the world.)

13 On August 10, 1990, the Arab League meeting in Cairo voted to join the United States in sending Arab forces to defend Saudi Arabia.

14 On November 29, 1990, the U.N. Security Council (Resolution 678) voted to authorize the United States and its allies to expel Iraq from Kuwait by force if Saddam refused to withdraw by January 15, 1991.

15 On January 16, 1991, Operation Desert Storm began.

16 On April 11, 1991, Iraq gave its assent to U.N. Resolution 687, which had been passed on April 3. Under its terms, Iraq agreed to destroy or remove all long-range ballistic missiles and all nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

Now, with this quick history lesson, explain to me where Saddam understands anything but force. Explain to me who is arrogant? I would love Kerry to convince me that Saddam had no interest in cooperating with Usama bin Laden.

I am amazed that the American people can be so filled with hate towards their President that they are willing to trash our future for short term political gain.. I am shocked at the hatchet job that Kerry and the Far Left are doing to our allies. I am perplexed by the willingness of the Kerry and his supporters to join the side of those steeped corrupted by the Oil for Food scandal. I am surprised by the arrogance of American Leftist who cling to dictators across the globe. I am frightened by Kerry’s constant bashing of those who are helping us defeat this axis of terror, while at the same time embracing those foreign leaders that used a UN Humanitarian effort to scam these very people! I shudder at the thought of my children’s future being put into the hands of a Democrat Party that daily belittles the noble sacrifices of brave troops sent by our allies. This same party refers to people up their necks in scandal as the ones we need ask permission of to defend ourselves!

The scariest thing of all is this: the descendants of men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan can be so easily swayed into dismay. If the war on Iraq had lasted only 90 days, as Desert Storm had; there would be no doubt that it was the right thing to do. Have we become so spoiled that we measure right and wrong by convenience? What if we had lost twice as many troops as we have today, but only in 90 days? What are we measuring the cost of freedom and peace upon? The time it takes to achieve destroying the enemy? Is there a magic number of soldier deaths that makes us shrivel up and decide our children can deal with it 12 years from now. Are we honestly too cowardly and weak to handle troops dying for the quest of peace,? We should instead trade Liberty’s progress for compliance with the arrogance of men like Saddam?

Be honest with yourself. Would you look Saddam in the eye and trust him with anything? Where is the choice here, folks? Where? John Kerry does not have my child in his best interest. President Bush will do all in his power to protect my child. President Bush values my brother’s bravery and sacrafice as he fights in Iraq to protect my children. President Bush will not accept defeat, even if victory makes him unpopular with those that embrace the likes of Saddam.