BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Elie Wiesel supports the war

4 comments on Elie Wiesel supports the war

Elie Wiesel supports the war
: Wiesel writing in the LA Times today:

Though I oppose war, I am in favor of intervention when, as in this case because of Hussein’s equivocations and procrastinations, no other option remains.

The recent past shows that only military intervention stopped bloodshed in the Balkans and destroyed the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Moreover, had the international community intervened in Rwanda, more than 800,000 men, women and children would not have perished there.

Had Europe’s great powers intervened against Adolf Hitler’s aggressive ambitions in 1938 instead of appeasing him in Munich, humanity would have been spared the unprecedented horrors of World War II.

Does this apply to the present situation in Iraq? It does. Hussein must be stopped and disarmed. Even our European allies who oppose us now agree in principle, though they insist on waiting.

But time always plays in dictators’ favor….

What it comes down to is this: We have a moral obligation to intervene where evil is in control. Today, that place is Iraq.

4 responses to “Elie Wiesel supports the war”

  1. felix culpepper Avatar
    felix culpepper

    I am sick and tired of all these lies about Balkan intervention, whether it is Elie Wiesel, who has made a career of the holocaust, or other ignoramuses or flagrant LIARS. The facts are as follows:
    1. When it became clear that, after Tito’s death, Yugoslavia was breaking up, Secretary of State James Baker the third stopped by in Belgrade (on his way to Mongolia), met with the Yugo generals and told them that U.S. policy was that Yugoslavia should remain as one country.
    2. The generals, and Milosevic, understood this as a green light to step up the shooting.
    3. The next step was that the U.S. embargoes all arms shipments to Yugoslavia. Since the Serbs had all the artillery, war planes, tanks, etc. the net effect was that Serbs could kill, destroy (and rape) at their leisure, which is exactly what happened. The Croats, and subsequently the Bosnians, were essentially unarmed (a few handguns and hunting rifles). We did nothing to help them. Worse, we refused to give them arms to defend themselves. At no point did either the Croats or the Bosnians request that anyone come to their aid (don’t take my word for it – take a trip there and ask the people). All they asked was that the embargo be lifted.
    4. Iran stepped in and sold arms to the Croats and Bosnians enabling them to resist the Serbs.
    The Blowback: The Bosnian muslims, possibly the most secular muslims in the world at that time – they ate pork, drank booze, etc. – became radicalized. Saudi money flooded in with the fanatical brand of Islam that they preach. Iranian agents moved freely in Bosnia. As I write they have established a base of operations in Bosnia – their agents monitor U.S. troops and agents there around the clock.
    I can document everything I have written here! So much for so-called American ‘innocence’ prior to 9/11!

  2. scudbud Avatar
    scudbud

    For argument’s sake, let’s accept that all this is true. Are you saying that the actions of the US government in this case justify the 9-11 attack on civilians?

  3. Gary Farber Avatar
    Gary Farber

    It’s not news that Wiesel supports the war, Jeff. I blogged this on January 25th, when his substantially identical piece appeared in the Observer.
    Well, I guess it’s news if you don’t read my blog.
    ;-)

  4. Robin Roberts Avatar
    Robin Roberts

    Hey, this is great. We got Elie Wiesel, the anti-war types got Sean Penn …