Deconstructing Neville

Hello, everyone. Skippy here, to discuss the proper application of history. While it's true that those who don't remember History are doomed to repeat it, that is even more true of those that flunked History in the first place.

The name of Chamberlain has been bandied about a lot in recent weeks when discussing the pro's and cons of invading Iraq (and believe me, when it comes to valid reasons for invading, there are plenty of cons out there).

Prime Minister Chamberlain, for those of you doomed to repeat History, was the man who made the historic (or perhaps hysteric) Munich Pact with Adolf Hitler, thus allowing the Germans to take over Czechoslovakia in 1938, and encouraging those nutty Hessians to goose-step their way into Poland in '39. And well, the rest is, we are doomed to repeat, History. Chamberlain's statement of attaining "Peace in Our Time," of course, was shown to be tragically wrong.

And so some 65 years later or so, those who would love to unilaterially invade Iraq and kick some Saddam Hussein butt are accusing those of us who advise caution of being like Minister Chamberlain. But, we argue, as if there weren't enough things to argue about already, this metaphor is like our Grandad after his prostate operation: It can't hold water.

Matthew Engel in the Guardian says that there was Only One Adolf Hitler:

"Let's be clear about this. Saddam Hussein is not Hitler, as hysterical Americans keep claiming. The charges of external violence are 12 years old. There is no coherent evidence that he had any plans (at least before the US began goading him) for more adventures, merely that he is obsessed with stockpiling weaponry, a charge that applies equally to the Pentagon. Far from seeking global or regional domination, he only dominates portions of Iraq."

Mr. Engel goes on to say that George Bush is not Hitler either, with which we heartily agree. Hitler could form coherent sentences (ok, we admit, that was a cheap shot - but he makes it so easy). Anyway, that's not really our point.

Before Chamberlain made the blunder that would assure his name go down in the books, Germany had already invaded and occupied Austria. And it made no signs of leaving. Germany was obviously an 800 pound gorilla, and that was one of the many reasons Chamberlain became the Great Appeaser, wrong-headed an approach as it was.

Another big problem with the Chamberlain analogy is that Germany was, at the time, a first rate-industrial power. Granted, it suffered supreme set backs in the unfortunately-misnamed War to End All Wars, but was coming back rather strong, at least in terms of armament and technology. And although the first Great Depression hit Germany as hard as the U.S., it had one of the four largest economies in the world at the time.

One cannot say anything close to that about Iraq. (Well, one can, but then one would be put in the nuthouse). And let's face it: sure, Saddam likes to feed one zoo animal to another, but when was the last time Iraq invaded somebody? And what happened then? That's right, his forces were immediately routed and sent back home.

Oh, but you say, Saddam gassed the Kurds! That's right, you are correct. And we'll give you $5.00 if you can name the village that was gassed. And $5.00 more if you can tell us what year. And another $5.00, for a total of $15.00, if you can tell us the US's response to that terrible tragedy. Give up? The answers are, Halabja, 1988, and Nothing.

(We won't even get into how our allies, the Turks, treat the same minority group, the Kurds).

Our point, sarcastic as it is, comes down to this: for us to be Neville Chamberlain, Hussein has to be Hitler, and a very specific Hitler: a Hitler who already has invaded and occupied countries and is posed to do the same again. A Hitler with economic and military power to do so. A Hitler that threatens immediate war.

Saddam is a bad, bad despot (well, actually, no, he's very good at being a despot, he's just a despicable human being). But he's not about to invade anybody. He can hardly hold his own patch of sand. Thanks to our sanctions, his economy is in the toilet. And remember, Hitler had 95 warships. Saddam is lucky if he has an outboard.

Saddam must be dealt with. But he's no Hitler. And, ergo, we are no Neville Chamberlain. Richard Chamberlain, maybe. But that's as far as we will go.