The only way to bring any lasting peace to the Persian Gulf is
to give war a chance. We've had 12 years of "peace" since the last Gulf war,
which Saddam Hussein has used to rebuild his military infrastructure,
stockpile weapons of mass destruction, and starve and oppress his people.
Now, our feckless allies at the United Nations, France and Germany would
like us to wait longer -- weeks, months, perhaps years -- while Saddam
imports the raw materials to build even more horrifying weapons, some of it
sold by our erstwhile "friends."
Enough is enough.
The French and Germans are more worried about American power
than they are about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Nothing is
likely to change their minds, save perhaps an Iraqi-built "dirty bomb"
exploding in the Paris Metro or an Iraqi anthrax or nerve gas attack on
Berlin. Of course, that's not going to happen. Saddam Hussein understands
who his protectors are. But don't bet that a similar attack on Washington or
New York would prompt a change of heart among our peacenik allies. We'd no
doubt get an I-told-you-so lecture about the consequences of American
Both France and Germany are has-beens on the stage of history.
France hasn't been a great power since the Duke of Wellington defeated
Napoleon at Waterloo, despite strutting about like peacocks ready to lead
the New Europe. Germany's claim to world-class power is of more recent
vintage. But the last time Germany played out its ambition to lead the
world, some 50 million people died.
Neither nation would have survived intact into the 21st century
were it not for the United States. Twenty-four thousand Americans shed their
blood to liberate France in the 15-day battle that began on the beaches of
Normandy. Trillions of American dollars rebuilt West Germany and defended it
from Soviet aggression for more than 50 years. But like poor relatives who
resent the charity of their wealthier family members, the French and Germans
spend more time envying than thanking us for our generosity.
Bloated welfare states have enervated both countries' economies.
The populations of both nations are literally dying off, kept on life
support by migrations from the Middle East and Africa. With birthrates
plummeting among native stock Europeans, these newest immigrants may finally
accomplish what the Ottomans couldn't at the Siege of Vienna: the Islamic
conquest of Europe. In the wake of these demographic changes, relations
between the United States and these putative allies can only get worse.
So what do we possibly gain by allowing Jacques Chirac and
Gerhard Schroeder to dictate our time schedule in dealing with the Iraqi
threat? Chirac has already signaled that France will veto any new U.N.
Security Council resolution that implies a deadline for Iraqi compliance. If
we were to get some watered-down resolution through the Security Council --
by no means a sure bet even if France went along, since both Russia and
China might veto it as well -- what assurance do we have that the French
won't change their minds again, as they apparently have after voting in
favor of previous resolutions calling on Saddam to disarm or face the
The war in Iraq is likely to be short and decisive. The only
unknown factor is whether Saddam will indeed use his weapons of mass
destruction against U.S. troops. Even the quisling French would have a hard
time explaining Saddam's supposed cooperation with UN weapons inspectors in
that event. Whether Saddam uses them or not, Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction will be unearthed by a U.S. invasion. When that happens, not
even Johnnie Cochran could convince the world that Saddam was the innocent
party and President Bush the great threat to world peace.
We may never get France or Germany to love us. If we destroy
Saddam's weapons and liberate Iraq, however, it won't matter. Better that we
earn the respect and fear of our enemies than the undying affection of our