crowd didn't help
his April 6 letter, "Laughable if it wasn't tragic," Nick Maync-Matsumoto
tries to draw a parallel between the actions of U.S. President George W.
Bush in Iraq and the Christian Crusades of the Middle Ages. But the letter
fails to tell the whole story, such as the fact that within a span of only
100 years after the death of the prophet Mohammed (632 A.D.) essentially
all of formerly Christian Palestine, Syria, Egypt, northern Africa and
Spain were converted to Islam. Was this achieved peacefully by proselyting?
No, by Islam's armies. In 1095, Pope Urban II launched the Crusades and
called for the retaking of
which was of little importance to the Islamic world at that time. Yes, the
Crusaders committed atrocities, but had Islam not employed the sword in
the first place, there would never have been the Crusades. Bush is not
waging a crusade against Islam, in general, or against Iraq for its oil.
war in Iraq is not to remove weapons of mass destruction, remove a tyrant
among tyrants, finish Bush's family business, or instill democracy in the
Middle East. It is for all of these reasons. Get it? Three weeks into the
war, it was clear that the only thing the "what did they do to
us?" antiwar apologist movement accomplished was to cause more Iraqi
deaths. For it not only emboldened Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his
followers, but also deterred a fierce anti-Hussein movement from uprisings
that could have ended the war sooner.
Hussein off his horse for good, you will now see clearly how the liberated
Iraqis feel. The largely white, secular and Christian West, in particular,
should be ashamed for not supporting the Iraqi people against this evil
regime. I dare say that North Korean and Middle Eastern rulers have now
taken note of just how serious the U.S. is in seeing change in the status