Quote:
Originally posted by cjorli@Mar 11 2003, 09:01 AM
Well, just in a defense of removing Sadam...
I have a friend who is a missionary in Jordan, she is a real person and this is an actual report that she gave me personally. She works with many refugees who manage to get out of Iraq without getting killed. The horror stories that have been brought over the boarder are sickening. She says that many who live under Sadam control live in absolute fear everyday of their lives. One report that one of her students told her was that the reason why he and his family fled the country was because one of Sadam's undercover plants (a device to instill fear) accused his father of saying some unbecoming things about their "wonderful" leader. His father was taken into custody immediately and later killed for the offense. No judicial review, no trial or interrogation, just killed for an accusation. The family then fled for their lives because they knew that the common practice was to kill the entire family, not just the offender.
That's just one instance that my friend was able to share with me. The source is credible and I believe what she told me was true. From what it sounds like, this is the norm in Iraq under Sadam's rule.
I understand that there is alot at stake here. At the same time, many people fear for their lives everyday and hope that what they say won't offend any of Sadam's people. Who wants to live like that? Who would want our President to be like that? Bush may not always do what we'd like him to do, but he has a burden on his shoulders that I would never want to have. World politics is much more complex than we make it seem sometimes and I doubt that any of us would be sitting idly back if we were in the same position.
|
I have no problem with getting rid of Saddam. The guy should be removed.
Doing it with our military, using our citizens, at an unbelievably high cost to Americans, is what I have a problem with.
Iraq is a sovereign nation, whether we like it or not, whether we like it's leader or not. We have no right whatsoever to go in there and force things to be the way we think they should be. None whatsoever. Not legally, not morally.
In the Persian Gulf War, citizens in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces rose up and defeated Saddam's forces, guerilla-style. They did this on their own, and they did this with the understanding that the US AND the UN would reinforce them and help them finish the job on the other 4, as promised. We did not. We left every single one of them hanging, thanks to G. Bush, Sr., and went back home as "victors". They were unable to finish the job, since the remaining 4 provinces were the more central, heavier controlled provinces. They needed us, they needed the world, and we left them hanging out to dry. The retaliations by Saddam and his forces were gruesome, abhorent, cruel, and absolutely horrific. Again, thanks to us.
That is proof positive that our goal is most certainly not the "liberation" of Iraq, nor is it the elimination of a regime that supports terrorism. Those are excuses for media consumption. We're gearing up to violate a sovereign nation because we want its resources, and we want to make sure that nobody else gets them. Do we need Iraqi oil? Not really...we get more oil each year from Venezuela, and the Saudis have already agreed to make up the 2.5 million or so barrels of oil that Iraq exports anyway if Saddam destroys his oil fields. But, what we do need, or rather what the people who are friends of the Bushes and paid for their campaign need is the legal right to PROCESS that oil. The transport, the processing, etc. That's what American oil companies want.
Who has the lead right now on the legal right to transport, process, and sell Iraqi crude? Russia and France. Who are the two countries leading the opposition in the UN? Russia and France. What a coincidence! (as reported by Time last month)
The American people are being sold a stinky bill of goods that doesn't make sense under scrutiny. We don't have any direct evidence that Iraq was behind 9/11. None whatsoever. We don't have any legal or moral right to attack Iraq. None whatsoever. Heck, the majority of the 9/11 terrorists (and bin Laden himself) are/were Saudis, not Iraqis.
We are actually planning to do to Iraq exactly what Japan did to us in 1941 (aside from the surprise aspect). That is not an exaggeration. Should we act in concert with the rest of the world to prevent aggression against a victimized country like Kuwait, if necessary? Absolutely. Should we manufacture a set of circumstances and political grandstanding to win approval for a unilateral action that has no basis in law or decency? Absolutely not.
Just think of the ripple effect this will have. Have you any idea what will happen to America if gasoline goes to $3 a gallon? $5? I live in the Detroit, MI area. There is no public transportation here. There's no way a family on the poverty level, or even "middle class" (if there still is such a thing) can afford gas at $3 a gallon, or even 2-2.50 for long. How do you keep your job when you can't fuel your car to drive to work each day? The ripple effect of this war will be ENORMOUS, not to mention the loss of life.
If the Iraqi people want Saddam out, let them push him out, just as we did with the British. We will help them, just as the French helped us (though France's motives were suspect even then). There is no reason to destroy our economy, kill our citizens, kill Iraqi citizens, and risk UN sanctions by going to war except pride, ego, and money.
I cannot support a course of action that is so obviously 1) irrational, 2) unnecessary, 3) immoral, 4) illegal, and 5) so damaging to ourselves. It's insanity. Obviously, there are those who can, which is their right in America, but I am not one of them.
JT$
Linear Mode
