Voice of Reason: War only creates more problems
If many conservatives I’ve heard are to be believed, those of us who oppose the current war in Iraq are an unpatriotic, un-American (whatever that means) group of traitors who secretly wish for an Iraqi victory. This is an implication I resent and one that is wholly without merit or reason.
The fact is that those of us on the “left” have just a deep love of this country as do those on the “right.” We, too, realize and appreciate the greatness of America, most importantly the unparalleled freedoms we Americans enjoy. At the same time, however, we realize this country is far from perfect. Our mantra is not “my country, right or wrong,” but “my country, while often right, is not always so, and can always be made better.”
It is because we liberals and peace activists love America so much that we question, criticize and yes, even protest, the government’s decisions and policies in regard to this war. We want this country to be the best it can be, “a more perfect union.”
The right to dissent and question their government, especially in times of war, is not just a right of all Americans (until, that is, Ashcroft and company attack this civil liberty as well), but our responsibility. Dissent is patriotism too.
This said, here are my personal objections to, and concerns with, this war being waged in my name and with my tax dollars:
• This war is not a defensive war. To be sure, this is an illegal and unsanctioned political war of choice and aggression. Based purely on speculation, we have invaded a sovereign country which has not attacked us, nor ever threatened to. Sounds like we’re the rogue state now.
• A so-called “pre-emptive” war, this unilateral conflict sets a dangerous precedent. If it’s OK for us to “pre-empt” Iraq without the approval of the international community through the U.N., what’s to stop, say, nuclear power Pakistan from “pre-emptively” striking arch-enemy and fellow nuclear power India? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, after all.
• There is no absolute proof Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, only circumstantial evidence. North Korea, on the other hand, does in fact possess missiles that can reach the West Coast and the nukes to put inside them, and has stated it would not rule out a pre-emptive strike against us. Which country is more of a threat to us? And why is diplomacy good enough for North Korea, but not for Iraq?
• There’s also no proof Saddam had anything to do with 9/11 or is in any way connected to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, despite what Bush (another unelected warlord) and his regime would have us believe. Anything to the contrary is pure speculation. In fact, Saddam and bin Laden virtually hate each other. One is a secular dictator, the other is an Islamic fundamentalist who has called Saddam an infidel.
• In addition to protecting Americans from future attack, the administration also lists the noble goal of liberating the oppressed people of Iraq as a reason for war. This however, is not in line with their and other administrations’ policies which have, in fact, been to support dictators (at least those who tow the American line), no matter how ruthlessly they treat their own populations. If we’re so concerned about liberty, why aren’t we sending troops to Cuba, North Korea, China, Myanmar, Cambodia, Saudi Arabia, Laos, Nigeria, Congo, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan?
• Instead of making the U.S. and the world safer from terrorism, I fear this war will actually inspire more attacks. There’s nothing like an unsanctioned war by the “Great Satan” and its Koalition of the Killing to further destabilize the Middle East and aid al-Qaeda recruitment all across the Muslim world.
In making these points, this is not to say I don’t support our troops. It is precisely because I do support them that I say we need to halt this war immediately and bring them all safely home.
(Will Stewart is a reporter for the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].)