UN IRAQI escribe sobre cómo la izquierda de los países occidentales traicionó a su país:

We did believe, however, that democracy and human rights were important factors in Western civilization. So it came as a shock to us when millions of people began demonstrating across the world against America’s build-up to the invasion of our country. We supposed the protests were by people who had no idea about the terrible atrocities that the regime had inflicted upon us for decades. We assumed that once they learned what had happened in Iraq, they would change their minds, or modify their opposition to the war.

Lo equivocado que estaba. Naseer, que así se llama el autor del artículo, explica cómo se fue dando cuenta de ello: hablando con quienes -periodistas, activistas, empleados de ONGs- habían ido a su país a explicarle a él la situación con aire condescendiente, de superioridad, como si la conocieran mejor que él a pesar de haber acabado de llegar (¿no es una forma de racismo el tratar a los 'nativos' como si no fuesen seres maduros y racionales, sino casi como a niños a quienes hay que explicarles como son 'realmente' las cosas?)

Y sigue Naseer:

After those, and many other, experiences, we finally comprehended how little we had in common with these “peace activists” who constantly decried American crimes, and hated to listen to us talk about the terrible long nightmare that ended with the collapse of the regime. We came to understand how these “humanitarians” experienced a sort of pleasure when terrorists or former remnants of the regime created destruction in Iraq—just so they could feel that they were right, and the Americans wrong!

Worse, we realized it was hopeless to make them grasp our feelings. We believed—and still believe--that America’s removal of the regime opened a new way for democracy. At the same time, we have no illusions that the U.S. came to Iraq on a white horse to save our people. We understand this war is all about national interests, and that America’s interests are mainly about defeating terrorism. At this moment, though, U.S. interests are doing more to bring about democracy and freedom in Iraq than, say, the policies of France and Russia—countries which also care little for the Iraqi people and, worse, did their best to save Saddam from destruction until the last moment.

It’s worth noting, as well, that the general attitude of peace activists I met was tension and anger. They were impossible to reason with. This was because, on one hand, the sometimes considerable risks they took to oppose the war made them unable to accept the fact that their cause was not as noble as they believed. Then, too, their dogmatic anti-American attitudes naturally drew them to guides, translators, drivers and Iraqi acquaintances who were themselves supporters of the regime. These Iraqis, in turn, affected the peace activists until they came to share almost the same judgments and opinions as the terrorists and defenders of Saddam.

ACTUALIZACIÓN. No puedo corregir el error, por contaminación del inglés, en la segunda palabra del post (debería ser "iraquí", no "iraqi") porque me cambiaría la URL de la anotación. Pero que conste que me he dado cuenta...