Iraq.
65 million Americans watched the State of the Union address. That’s a bunch. In fact, that’s the most people that have ever watched it in history, which may not be as impressive as it sounds since a) the population keeps growing, b) the number of people with TVs is growing, and c) we’re probably going to war.
I watched most of it with some friends, and I tried to watch it as dispassionately as I could. I have to applaud Dubya’s speech writers, they hit every buzzword and panic button you can imagine. Now Americans have horrifying images of Iraqi-supported Al Qaeda terrorists hijacking airplanes filled with chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction. Those of you that heard the speech can vouch that that sentence, which seems calculated beyond comprehension, is almost verbatim. Yeah, Dubya fired up the rhetoric machine and really cranked the thumbscrews down on those things that most frighten us to gain support for going after Hussein and Iraq.
I personally can’t help but feel that our leadership is going down a very perilous path. We’re alienating past allies, seeding fear and more hatred among our enemies, and grasping for new, tenuous allies in odd places. I sincerely believe that our foreign policy over the decades has placed us in an entirely untenable position in every aspect of the term.
un·ten·a·ble – adj. 1. Being such that defense or maintenance is impossible. 2. (of theories etc) incapable of being defended or justified.
Yeah, that about sums it up. I heard on NPR a few weeks ago when the North Korean nuclear arms situation was just getting warmed up interviews on the streets in Seoul. It was an even split between people who said, in essence, that America should butt out of “internal” Korean affairs and people who said that America acts as the policemen of the world and should be helping more to stabilize the region. Interestingly, I heard similar things when NPR went to interview people in the streets of Kuwait… a country that has already been invaded by her neighbor.
I can’t help but think of all the scenarios in Iraq. What happens if we just say “fine folks, we’re outta here”? Just pick up and leave the Middle East. “You don’t want us? Color us gone, have fun storming the castle.” What happens? I think there’s a number of complex things that happen. The people who think we should be more involved will hate us for abandoning them… almost goes without saying. Saddam somehow scrapes up some bad weapons and storms back into Kuwait? Maybe, maybe not. What happens then? Well, the world falls in on him. Who’s he threatening with the weapons? I certainly don’t think he’d threaten to hit Kuwait with biologicals, as that’s a little too close for comfort. Hit his neighbors with nuclear weapons? We’ve got more. China has more, as does Russia. Not something that seems too logical, since it escalates and Iraq, to borrow a distasteful euphamism, becomes a gleaming parking lot. Yes, that means innocent Iraqis die. I know there are innocent Iraqis, as Iraq isn’t the great Satan, the head of Iraq is megalomaniacal, and apparently still has conquest on the brain. So, worst case in that case is a country gets attacked with some weapons, then Iraq disappears. That’s a pretty bad case.
So, we go in. What happens then? Saddam knows we want him dead this time around. Do you think he’ll abide by some gentlemens’ agreement and not use his more odious weapons this time around? No. I think when push comes to shove, he’ll use whatever he has available. So, end result is about the same.
I know I’m hopping around a lot, but I’m no Pulitzer Prize winner, just rambling. Does he even have anything? Are we going in for the reasons we say we are? I think, quite honestly, that he has weapons he shouldn’t have… of course, I wouldn’t trust the asshole with a Nerf gun, but that’s beside the point. Yeah, I figure he’s gotten ahold of something he shouldn’t have. Does that mean that we, and I mean we need to go charging in there to “disarm” him? Unilaterally, I mean. At the expense of pissing off our allies, and the Islamic world that believes that this is simply another American, Christian attack on an Islamic nation?
No. I’m as hawkish as I can be, but I don’t support this action for the reasons that have been provided to us. Unless there’s something substantive in this supposed “mountain of evidence” the White House claims exists, I don’t think we have any right to start bombing these people.
I remember when I thought that America was a country that all other countries looked up to as role models. “See this?” America would say, “this is how to run a country.” I’m not so naive anymore.
5 Responses to “Weighing In”
Bah! Gotta go pick up my wife from work. I shall return. Now I’m gonna hafta open the whole can-o-worms. Many things to say. I’ll finish this later.
You’re sexay when your hawkish. Bring it, baldie
.
Ok, where to start? Saddam won’t hit Kuwait with biological weapons? He’s already annhilated entire villages in his own country; he has no respect for life regardless of nationality. Do we just let him go until he’s as powerful as Hitler was when we joined WWII after being bombed by Japan?(Al Qaeda) I don’t think that would be a good idea. A dictator like Saddam is all the Middle East needs to galvanize their efforts into a powerful axis of deranged muslims. I believe that the high percentage of uneducated populations there are affecting their views as well, especially when their only source of information comes from their nationally sponsored news stations. So I don’t think I can give any merit whatsoever to street interviews of the region. Yes innocent Iraqis will die. How many? Who knows?, but I’m guessing we can call it even for the Trade Center attack. Do I believe Saddam was involved? Hell yes. Should we attack Iraq and overthrow Saddam’s regime? I say yes, he’s caused the world enough sorrow and angst, and been an irresponsible member of the New Order. I do believe that if we have evidence to prove his possession of banned weapons that we should at least present all or most of it to the U.N. so we don’t look like a bunch of finger-pointing morons. On the question of whether our foreign policy has some flaws; yeah, we aren’t doing very well in that facet. Although I do believe that this is still THE best country to live in, we do have some issues that need to be resolved before I can say that we’re doing the best we can. We have GOT to rid ourselves of our insatiable addiction to foreign oil; we need to be building the infrastructure to distribute hydrogen fuel cells NOW! Our national policy has been skewed because of our addiction to oil, I would liken that to moving closer to town so I can get my bottle of vodka faster when the DT’s hit. I don’t think isolationism is the way to go either, who would have stopped Iraq from absorbing Kuwait? Nobody but us for $1000 Alex. Did you watch The Gangs of New York yet? When Bill Cutting asks Amsterdam what keeps the order? His answer was fear. And if we don’t kick some non-fearing tail there won’t be anyone that will fear us. With no fear comes disrespect which will eventually lead to you and me meeting in Iowa for our only vacation hot-spot of the world since Americans would be unwelcome abroad. Do we need to scare Italy or Spain? No, but we do need to let third-world dictators know that under no circumstances are we going to allow terrorism or other acts of violence to go unpunished and that said punishment will be swift and severe. If that means alienating the U.N. then so be it. France and Germany of all nations should be on our side on this and recognize the situation unfolding. Doesn’t anybody see the parrallelism with WWII? I bet if Iraq was neighbors with them in Europe that they’d be screaming for us to help them. Fuggin bleeding hearts. Ok, before I actually write a thesis I’m going to stop. I’ve rambled a bit, but it’s hard to cover this topic with just two partial sentences.
I think that many people are forgetting a couple of very important facts about attacking Iraq. The first time that we went to war was to save Kuwait. Was that really our job? It is dispicable what Hussein did, but how many millions of Muslims (peace loving) are out there who stood by as well? We are not a welcome presence in the Middle East. They do not want what we have. Sure, they would like to be fed and clothed and sheltered, but they do not want to change their fundamental belief system which is required before they can become like America. My second point is that our government leaders want to make this world a democratic world. That won’t mean a free world. Not when a large portion of the world is still living in the dark ages – they have not experienced the Reneissance and have no respect for the individual (yes, Communism is still in full force in different areas of the world, and there are tyrants running countries all over this Earth). America was created as a Democratic REPUBLIC – and we seem to have forgotten that. The republic is what makes this country so strong – not the democracy. With just a democracy people’s rights are subject to being voted away to preserve ‘order’. A republic recognizes the individual as more important then the state, not the other (Nazi) way. (Just ask someone to say the pledge of allegiance and a good many of them forget that little old part ‘and for the republic’…) Once American’s regain their sense of sovereignty as individuals from a too-large government, and then their country’s sovereignty from the UN we can survive this. Until then I worry we are in for Armageddon style life (or non-life).
Good stuff, guys.
Look who’s in the White House right now, as well as the Veep. Do you honestly think that these two have a vested interest in decreasing America’s dependence on oil? I think it’s a great idea, but an enormous segment of the economy of this country is based around oil and the means of using it.
I think he’d be more than happy to smack Kuwait with chemical or nuclear weapons, probably chemical since nucelar would tend to make harvesting oil there somewhat difficult, but biological just makes no sense and that was my point. Biological weapons have a sneaky penchant for spreading farther than you would like.
Do I think that people should be pushing us around? No. There’s a difference between being pushed around and poking our own noses into everything else in the world. And fear doesn’t necessarily equate to respect. Or should I say that fear is not the only path to respect, nor would I necessarily say it’s the best. With fear comes equal parts of loathing and distrust… things that don’t make it any easier for Americans currently travelling abroad, no?
Somewhat, but not enough, I think. For all his bluster and antagonism, Saddam doesn’t have the wherewithal to do what Hitler did. Though what you said about “galvanizing the effort of Muslims” comes more into play when you consider that Muslims already feel that this move against Saddam is a Christian attack against a Muslim country, not a fight to free a beleagured population from the bonds of tyranny as we would have them believe. In that way, our actions could be said to be in more danger of causing parallelisms to WWII.
Ashley, very good points.
Depends who you ask. I think it was the UN’s job, as that is precisely the kind of thing that the Security Council of the UN is for. The fact that we sprang for a large part of it is debateable, but as the largest force in the world economy at that time, it was probably fitting too.