Worum es wirklich geht
Liest man aufmerksam die Berichterstattung der Medien über den Irak, so fällt auf, dass sich zunehmend die Erkenntnis breitmacht, dass die Urheber der Selbstmordattentate keineswegs nur die Koalitionstruppen, sondern längst auch Zivilisten ins Visier genommen haben, dass, in anderen Worten, das Anliegen der Terroristen nicht ein Ende der Besatzung, sondern eine Herrschaft des Schreckens ist, die genau das institutionalisiert, dessen sich ihre Anhänger zu ihrer Durchsetzung bedienen: Die rohe Gewalt.
Einer, der das immer noch nicht begriffen hat, ist der britische Abgeordnete George Galloway (via American Future), für den der demokratisch gewählte amerikanische Präsident George Bush mehr kriminelle Eenergie besitzt als der jordanische Schlächter al-Zarqawi:
Let’s keep this clearly in perspective: Most of the children who died in Iraq were killed by George Bush, not by Zarqawi. Most of the schools that were wrecked, buses that were bombed, hospitals that were destroyed, lives that were taken, were taken by George Bush, not by Zarqawi. Number two: Most of the resistance in Iraq is not Zarqawi, It’s not foreign (…). Most of their resistance are Iraqis resisting the foreign occupation of their country.
Realitätsresistenz war schon immer ein wesentlicher Charakterzug aller Gegner einer Befreiung des Irak von Saddam Husseins Baath-Regime. Nur wer souverän unliebsame Tatsachen ausblendet, kann Behauptungen wie die von Galloway aufstellen. Wo der Hebel gegen den Terrorismus wirklich anzusetzen ist, zeigt dagegen Mohammed T. Al-Rasheed in den Arab News:
It took a heavy price for Tony Blair to recognize that he is fighting an “ideology.” Good for him. Now that this basic premise is clear, let us see what he is to do about it. Rushing off to war in Iraq did not bring terror to London. Those who are in their ivory towers pontificating about this matter are wrong — dead wrong! For once Blair is right and he should be supported unconditionally. (…)
Here is the solution: If we know that at least one of the London bombers is a teenager, and assume that many in Iraq and elsewhere are of the same age, the question is what sort of brainwashing pushes these people to do what they do. If you talk to government officials you will not get anywhere. They will simply tell you that they “condemn” it. Go to the streets, enter the schools, and infiltrate the dreamy paradise-seekers. In their eyes, if not in their actions, you will find the answers.
Und Michael Ledeen vom National Review beleuchtet das Vorgehen ausländischer islamistischer Einflussnahme auf die Geschehnisse im Irak, die nach Galloway allenfalls marginal sein sollen:
One of my favorite reporters called late last week, saying he had learned that Coalition forces in Iraq had captured an Iranian vehicle entering Iraq with large quantities of shaped explosives, obviously headed for the terrorists. “So what?” was my reply. It happens most every day. But he was baffled. Why would the Iranians be supporting terrorist actions against Shiites? After all, didn’t they want the Shiites to prevail in Iraq, so that there could be an Islamic republic there?
His question — and he’s a good reporter — shows once again how totally false stereotypes distort our ability to see what is in front of our noses, and the presumed unavoidable conflict between Sunnis and Shiites is one of the worst. (…) The mullahs and their prize thugs love to smash and kill Shiites. Last week in Basra, according to the brave blogger “Iraq the Model,” (Shiite) students at the major universities were badly beaten, two of them killed, by “Sadrists and Mahdi Army militiamen” (that is to say, radical Shiites). Their crime was to hold a picnic for both boys and girls.
On the other side of the presumed great religious divide, Sunni terrorists — above all, those who work with the Iranians — love to kill their fellow Sunnis. Just a few days ago “al Qaeda in Iraq,” which is commanded by the (Jordanian) Sunni Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, murdered two Algerian (Sunni) diplomats in Iraq, calling them “apostates and allies of Jews and Christians.” (Please notice that the terrorists did not refer to “allies of America and other crusaders.” It was “Jews and Christians”). So Zarqawi unhesitatingly slaughters Sunnis when the opportunity arises.
Der griechische Publizist Andreas Andrianopoulos bringt es auf den Punkt:
Die Frage sind nicht die Anschläge der Terroristen. Die Frage ist, ob es Politiker gibt, die dem Terrorismus die Stirn zu bieten vermögen, ohne die grundlegenden Werte der westlichen Demokratie aufzugeben.
Andrianopoulos erinnert auch daran (nicht als Erster!), dass die Anschläge auf das World Trade Center und die US-Botschaft in Kenia schon vor der Invasion des Irak und Afghanistans stattgefunden haben. Ob Galloway diese Wahrheit ertragen kann?
–––