|
Pulse of the Twin Cities Login |
|
If you do not have an account yet
Create One.
|
|
|
Twin Town High (vol. 8) |
|
|
|
|
Why Should We Go to War with Iraq?
Wednesday 28 August @ 10:05:41 |
 by Marie Braun
For months, the Bush administration has been preparing Americans for another war with Iraq, claiming that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction and presents a serious threat to national and global security. Have they considered the following:
1. There has been no attack on the U.S. by Iraq and no documented evidence made public which can link Iraq to 9/11.
2. The CIA confirmed that it has “no evidence that Iraq has engaged in terrorist operations against the U.S. in nearly a decade, and the agency is also convinced that Saddam Hussein has not provided chemical or biological weapons to Al-Qaida or related terrorist groups” (New York Times, Feb. 2, 2002).
3. A provoked war with Iraq and an attempt to dislodge Saddam Hussein will likely result in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and would cause immense suffering to a population which has already been devastated by the Persian Gulf War and nearly 12 years of the most pervasive sanctions ever placed upon a country in this century.
4. Such a war could also result in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers.
5. It would stir up more anti-American feeling, which could result in more suicide bombings and/or terrorist attacks.
6. It would cost tens of billions of our tax dollars. Additional military spending to support an intensive war with Iraq will further erode support for domestic social programs, which are steadily and rapidly deteriorating.
7. The threat of weapons of mass destruction has been exaggerated. Chief UNSCOM inspector Capt. Scott Ritter (formerly of the U.S. marines) has testified again and again that “…From a qualitative standpoint, Iraq has in fact been disarmed. . . The chemical, biological, nuclear and long-range ballistic missile programs that were a real threat in 1991 had, by 1998, been destroyed…” (Boston Globe, Op-Ed 3/9/00). Saddam Hussein is more likely to use what he has if an attempt is made to unseat him.
8. It would require a long-term military occupation. At what cost and what happens when we leave?
9. It could result in the destabilization of Iraq and the whole of the Middle East.
10. It would undermine international cooperation. Neighboring Arab countries, including Kuwait, have expressed opposition to a war against Iraq. Opposition in Europe runs between 68 and 80 percent, depending on the poll (Chicago Tribune, March 3, 2002).
11. Use of the doctrine of preemption (attack them before they attack us) which the Bush Administration is promoting, would set a very dangerous precedent.
12. Many legal experts say that without a new United Nations Security Council resolution explicitly backing the use of force, an attack on Iraq would breach international law. Such an attack would make the U.S. an outlaw nation and undermine the UN Charter.
13. Iraq is indicating positive gestures of resuming inspections by United Nations weapons inspectors.
14. Restoring diplomatic relationships with Iraq and making a good faith effort to repair the damage that sanctions and war have done to the Iraqi economy and the life support systems of the people of Iraq, will do more to undermine popular support for Saddam Hussein and to diminish the resentment that fuels terrorism than further military or economic devastation can accomplish. This option opens the way for meaningful weapons verification mechanisms that are not based upon the continued humiliation and deprivation of a powerless people, but upon the hope for a collegial relationship between the proud and privileged citizens of the United States and the proud, but badly deprived, peopleof Iraq.
On May 25, 2002, the Washington Post reported that top U.S. military leaders are also expressing serious reservations about a war against Iraq. According to the article, the Joint Chiefs of Staff are concerned that an invasion of Iraq may require at least 200,000 troops, defense against chemical and biological weapons, and urban warfare that couldkill thousands of U.S. troops and many more Iraqi civilians.
It is gratifying to learn that some people in the government are beginning to question the wisdom of an attack on Iraq. While the Administration’s war agenda has seemed unstoppable, like a giant steamroller out of control, there are some indications that a real debate is going on behind the scenes. We can become a significant force in that debate by contacting the President and our legislators and insisting that they resist any moves by the administration to enter into an immoral, illegal, and costly war with Iraq.
|
|
 |
|
|
Comments -
Post Comment |
|
The comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for its content.
NO comments yet! Be the first!
|
|
|
