Beaten Around By Bush
A new column from Brent Stavig --
Now that the “war” with Iraq is inevitable and appears to be only a scant few weeks away, I think it’s a safe assumption that most Americans have decided where they stand on the issue. The polls indicate that the majority of Americans are supportive of a “war” with Iraq. But the voices of those who are opposed are still loud and strong.
These two groups have very defined reasons behind their support or disapproval of the pending conflict. Those in support see Saddam Hussein as a grave danger to America and the rest of the “free” world. They believe Bush’s assertion that Saddam is hiding vast arsenals of biological and chemical weapons and stands poised to use them whenever he sees fit.
Those who oppose the war see little evidence that Saddam has much of anything that can threaten America or the countries that border Iraq. They also see the enormously powerful American military; guided by the hand of the Bush administration, ready to pummel an entire country of innocent people because America disapproves of a single individual.
Much like the seemingly never-ending debate about abortion, the pending “war” in Iraq has created a line in the sand for most Americans; you’re either for it, or against it, and no amount of sound bites and U.N. speeches will sway either side’s opinion. But I get the feeling that there is a large percentage of Americans, who aren’t represented in polls, who are simply sick and tired of hearing about the issue. How many days can we wake up, turn on the news, and hear more rhetoric from Washington about Saddam not “complying”? How many more newspaper articles about the threatening yet invisible “weapons of mass destruction” can we stomach before we start throwing away Section A and reaching in haste for the Sports Section? How many inane and pointless speeches by President Bush, again and again calling on Saddam (not Iraq) to disarm can we be subjected to before we decide to simply shut Bush out?
The thing that bothers most people I know about Bush’s anti-Saddam rhetoric, is that it never quite makes a concrete or legitimate point. Surely President Bush must be getting frustrated that a large percentage of the American people simply aren’t buying his arguments for attacking Iraq? If there were a clear and obvious danger to America, wouldn’t it be painfully obvious to all of us? Would it really be necessary to try and convince us over and over? If America truly felt threatened by Saddam’s vast arsenal of chemical weapons wouldn’t we be cheering on the Commander-in-Chief with unbridled vigor and “patriotism”?
President Bush has tried to scare the American people into supporting the coming “war”. The Code Orange alerts, duct tape advice, lists of most-targeted cities, speeches from Osama Bin Laden that loosely purport a connection between Al Quaeda and Saddam, and malicious attempts at branding anyone who dares oppose the will of his administration as unpatriotic citizens, simply haven’t worked.
Now the Bush administration is changing tactics. Wednesday night he took to the airwaves in front of Old Glory, and with a gentle smile on his lips tried to convince the American people that we’re going into Iraq to “save” the citizens, not kill them. Well, obviously you don’t slaughter hundreds of thousands of people so they can be liberated. Or are we to understand that the pending Iraqi casualties were sacrificed to pave the way for Democracy?
Of course, one of the most dominating objectives of the invasion of Iraq is to seize the oil resources. On Wednesday night, President Bush addressed that issue too, stating that we want to “save” the oil resources so they’ll be intact for the benefit of the Iraqi people. Can you believe the sheer audacity of this man?
Many people have taken to the airwaves lately to make the case that oil is not the primary objective of the “war”. They argue that we don’t need Iraq’s oil since we get most of our oil from Venezuela and other sources. They argue that if we truly wanted Iraq’s oil we could simply purchase it from a very willing Saddam. They say that if we really wanted Iraq’s oil reserves we could simply walk in and take it without worrying about what the governments of the world think about it. Well, isn’t that what we’re about to do?
I don’t know what our real objective is. But I’m pretty sure it has nothing to do with “weapons of mass-destruction”, or the civil rights of the citizens of Iraq. I’m not even convinced that oil is the de facto reason for invading Iraq. Though how can it not be an enormous consideration? It’s estimated that the oil reserves in Iraq would supply the United States with energy for the next century. Let alone make close friends of the “Bush” White House wealthier than Saddam Hussein. How can that not be an attractive objective?
Lately I’ve heard “experts” saying that the primary goal of the invasion of Iraq is to establish an American stronghold smack in the middle of the ever-volatile Middle East. Our threatening presence would serve as a constant reminder to the other Middle Eastern countries that they are on “double secret probation” and had better watch their step. We would become the babysitter of the Middle East, with a front row seat to keep an eye on any aspiring terrorists, and to better control OPEC.
Let’s face it; the estimates of when the American forces will pull out of Iraq are a farce. Once America is in Iraq we are there to stay. Forever. We will install the leader of our choice, possibly draw up a new constitution for Iraq like we did for Japan after World War II, provide well-connected American construction firms with decades of work rebuilding the infrastructure of the country, and establish enormous military bases where our troops will be constantly at the ready for any neighbor who dares to get out of line.
I feel as beaten down as anyone about the pending “war”. But mostly I’m tired of feeling insulted by President Bush, who doesn’t even try to tell us the truth or primary objective for the invasion. I feel embarrassed having a “leader” who shows no respect to our allies, and arrogantly drives a wedge between us. I feel frightened for the safety of our troops who are about to enter into an unknown arena of warfare, where their health is probably more in jeopardy from the inoculations they’ve received than by any weapons Saddam might use against them. And I feel terrible about the thousands of Iraqi civilians, most of whom are 18 years old or younger, who are about to lose their lives in horrendous fashion.
The nervousness and apprehension we feel on this side of the pond is surely felt by our men and women in uniform who are stationed on the other side. I can see the uncertainty trickle uphill to the commanders who will decide to unleash a hellishly ferocious barrage on Baghdad in an attempt to thwart any possible retaliation, and in the course of gross overkill, reduce thousands of kind and beautiful people to a bloody smear on the sand.
Politicians have a mantra these days, “Nobody wants a war!” Well, avoiding a war is very simple, especially when your opponent can’t fight back.