“To announce
that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are
to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
-Theodore Roosevelt
Question: What do the director of the CIA, Jesse Jackson, four retired
top-ranking generals, most of our allied nations, many of the American
people and the late Senator Paul Wellstone have in common?
Answer: All believe the U.S. attacking Iraq alone is a bad idea.
I’m hardly what anyone would qualify as a dove. While I believe
war is always destructive and wrong, I think it is sometimes necessary
in cases where not going to war would result in even worse destruction
and horrors.
I have argued, in this space and elsewhere, in support of U.S. military
action in Afghanistan after 9-11, where the Taliban was directly
linked to Al-Qaeda. I support the state of Israel, albeit not all
of its actions. I still believe there should be a war on terrorism,
though not one that destroys the very civil liberties we’re
supposed to be defending.
But I think an attack on Iraq now would be wrong, devastating and
would cause terrorism to grow rather than doing anything to stop
it.
While I wouldn’t mind seeing Saddam Hussein dead and the Iraqi
people free, that’s not really the issue here. The world is
full of brutal despots, some of whom are our allies. To justify
a war against Iraq in particular, it needs to pose a clear and present
danger.
The Bush administration has accused Saddam of developing chemical
and biological weapons, wanting nuclear weapons and generally being
a nasty, evil person. This should not be news to anyone who has
been awake during the past decade; why does this suddenly justify
a war now?
Unlike a decade ago, when Iraq possessed a large army and was threatening
the region, Iraq today is devastated and not really in a position
to invade anyone.
The Bush administration said it has an abundance of evidence that
Iraq is a current threat but hasn’t shown the public anything
new. While I don’t expect every war plan to be revealed, if
there is such abundant evidence that Iraq needs to be stopped now,
why not show us enough to support their case?
Simply expecting a people to support a war because a leader says
it should is not a rationale that citizens of a free country should
ever accept.
In fact, 49 percent of the American people don’t accept it,
according to polls conducted by Time. magazine.
However, it is true that I don’t have access to much of the
information on Iraq, but what about those who do, what about the
commanders and officials who have been dealing with this for years?
George Tenet, director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA),
has said Saddam is unlikely to attack or use chemical weapons unless
he feels he is immediately threatened with being removed from power.
At Congressional hearings, four former military commanders warned
that the cost of invading Iraq could be very high and that war should
be a last resort.
General John Hoar, former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle
East, warned of a “nightmare scenario.”
“The result would be high casualties on both sides, as well
as in the civilian community. U.S. forces would certainly prevail,
but at what cost, and at what cost as the rest of the world watches
while we bomb and have artillery rounds exploded in densely populated
Iraqi neighborhoods,” Hoar said.
The cost, I believe, would be many new recruits for organizations
like Al-Qaeda, who are the real threat here, along with the shattering
of the international alliance against terrorism, and thousands of
dead, both American and Iraqi. This is not an outcome anyone should
wish for, and one that must be opposed. |
