Colin- Initially we were told that we needed to go to war on Iraq because they represent a credible threat to the United States, and were part of Al-Queda, therefore responsible for 9-11. With the inablility of the Bush Admin. to make this connection, even Powell's resorting to fabricating 'proof' of secret weapon factories, the argument has shifted. Now we are going in as heroic liberators of the oppressed people of Iraq. There are some problems with this. 1) The US plans to fire 300 cruise missiles into Iraq in the first 48 hours of warfare. By the navy's own admission, only 70 % of the bombs in the Desert Storm attack hit their targets. And only 10% of the tons and tons of bombs used were 'smart' bombs. The rest were just bombs. Baghdad is a large urban area. If we presume that Hussein is not going to be in the middle of a field waving a white flag, we can also assume massive casualties, despite the absurd propaganda about 'surgical strikes', a clean war, etc. 2) It is against the UN charter to attack a country if you are not being attacked. The gov't of the US has been repeatedly in the habit of deciding when and when not to play by the rules. Regarding the invasion of Panama, for instance, the entire UN with 2 exceptions, condemned the attack. We did it anyway. Ditto the Kyoto global warming treaty, nuclear proliferation agreements.... 3) Iraq, sadly, is not unique. There are ruthless tyrants all over. In Saudi Arabia, a woman accused of adultry is subject to execution. In Africa there has been horrible genocide. Our friends the Turks have been practicing genocide against the Kurds. Why have we not intervened? 4) Is the US gov't really concerned with the Iraqi people (who, remember, will have our bombs raining on their heads)? The gassing of the Kurds is frequently mentioned as an atrocity committed by Hussein. What is not often mentioned is that the US encouraged them to rise up against Hussein, and then did nothing to help them as they were being slaughtered. 5) This is an important point. The US has a rich history of regime change. The leaders we have installed or that we have helped to overthrow existing regimes in most cases have been the bloodiest thugs in modern history. Considering the 'regime' in power in the US now, there is little reason to think it will be different this time. Saddam and the Taliban are just two examples of bastards we have supported. 6) Bush the humanitarian has blocked increased spending on AIDS internationally. 8,000 people die of AIDS each day. Perhaps some of that $200 billion could be put to a better use. 7) The inspections are working. They were working before. Former inspector Scott Ritter talks about how they were making excellent progress tracking down Iraqi weapons. Then the US withdrew the inspectors. Why? Was a peaceful solution not part of the plan? (For more on this, search Scott Ritter). 8) Iraq's military might is only 25% of what it was formerly, another fact that is not being reported in the mainstream. 9) Attacking the middle east will create more hatred of the US 10) Creating a cycle of violence, and more terrorism. 11) Concerning biological weapons, the US currently has active germ warfare production facilities (in fact, the big Anthrax scare following the World Trade Center bombing was discovered to be domestic in origin. We did not bomb New Jersey). We are the only nation on earth that has dropped atomic bombs on another country. We have billions of dollars and many 'geniouses' busily developing newer and more advanced weapons of mass destruction. We have the 'School of the Americas', where thugs the world over come to be trained in the fine art of torture. We have been actively selling arms to the rest of the world for decades. It is our biggest export. This hipocracy has not been lost on the 12 million people who marched to protest the war this past weekend.
RR
