Peace is Destruction War is Bliss

On March 20, 2003 President George W. Bush made a live TV broadcast which aired across the nation, announcing the American military invasion of Iraq. He said that Saddam was a "damnable" dictator, with a nuclear weapons program, whose country was directly affiliated to terrorism, and who could be one of the biggest threats in the Middle East. His reasons were seen as logical, palpable, and abounding. Although these reasons all seemed true, the reality was that each separate generalization was flawed. While WMDs turned out to be his alias for oil and Saddam has now been slain...his basis for invading Iraq was based on fallible intelligence, and the reasons still are not proven with evidence. Then why was it so easy for the president to lie to the whole American population? Whatever the reason, with more and more troops dying everyday, one thing is sure; we need to pull out as soon as possible, without leaving the possible threat of more terrorist attacks.

We are now going into the fifth year of the war in Iraq, but what has been the result of 9/11 has seemed to do nothing but kill more than 100,000 American soldiers and Iraqi civilians combined, and put America in the biggest debt we've been in since the World Wars. And why did we enter Iraq in the first place? Was it the fear of the imaginary "WMD's" or was it really for the oil? With the triumph of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration felt that it had adequate military justification and "public support" in the USA for additional operations against supposed threats in the Middle East. "In the war on terror, Iraq is now the central front..." President Bush said on December 14, 2005 (Bush, George W. "President Discusses Iraqi Elections, Victory in the War on Terror." White House, Official Press Release). The U.S. government has tried to tell the people that the war in Iraq is significant to the American "War on Terrorism". But the so-called "patriotism" for invading Iraq was quickly changed as the first casualty reports came in. Apparently the American citizens thought that the idea of the war was to get in and get out, with very few casualties, and put a stop to terrorism. Following the invasion, many Americans saw the war as unneeded, and ridiculous.

Protests broke out all over the US following the invasion. Countries all around the world who were once our allies, started to oppose all militaristic and political aspects of the Iraq invasion. Shortly after the first known information was leaked out to the public about the possible invasion of Iraq , there was a worldwide protest. On January 16, 2002 protests broke out in countries such as Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Japan, Belgium, the Netherlands, Argentina, and the United States, where Americans attended a rally in Washington, D.C.. On February 15, 2003, as a response to the forthcoming invasion, the biggest worldwide protest took place with an estimated six to ten million people in over 60 countries around the world. With these protests going on, it is hard to believe that the president could be completely oblivious to the opposition of the war. Since then there have been thousands of protests around the world, although there are around 70 or so of which mad the world news. Many protests ended with arrests, and even injuries. On January 27, 2007 an astounding amount of activists and protesters gathered outside of the National Mall to demand an end to the Iraq War. "Before, we were a minority marching to convince a majority that occupying Iraq was a terrible idea," says Hany Khalil, spokesperson for March Organizers, United for Peace and Justice. "But today, for the first time we are out in force representing a majority of Americans who want us to get out of Iraq" (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070212/houppert, Karen Houppert). During this protest, Representative John Conyers, a democrat from Michigan, gave a speech, which addressed the November elections. He said, "[George Bush] is the commander of the military but he's not the commander of the citizens of this country. Not only is it in our power to stop George Bush, but it's our obligation."

Even those soldiers, who were once for the war, are now turning their backs on the president. The organization "Iraq Veterans Against the War" is trying to get their voices heard. The organization runs a website for all veterans or the Iraq war to speak out against the war. They have a member's area, where the members can post their own thoughts on the war. When entering the website the second link down reads, "Why we're against the war." After clicking on the link it takes you to a page with the ten main reasons one would join the website. Each reason has external links you can click on which would further the information on each specific reasoning. In one article on the website, stating why America cannot win the war, it reads, "In the coming months, America will have to confront some difficult choices. With the results of the 2006 general election, it is clear that American voters have already voiced their opinion that efforts in Iraq are not working. It has become clear that America cannot win the war in Iraq and it is time for a change in course" (http://www.ivaw.org/node/423, Vic Blazier). This article goes on to give historical background on why we cannot win the war, and opinions from military leaders on the war. He finishes the article stating, "As of Sunday, November 26, 2006, America's military involvement in the small Middle East country of Iraq has carried on longer than the U.S. engagement in World War II (Forbes, 2006), a war that spanned the entire globe. The only other war that America lost lasting longer than our WWII involvement was Vietnam -a localized guerilla war, just like Iraq. If history is an indicator, America cannot win in Iraq."

Since the end of the Gulf War in 1991, Iraq 's associations with the U.S. and U.N. have stayed meager. Starting after the end of the Gulf War, the U.S. has been enforcing the Persian Gulf War ceasefire, which prohibited Iraq from making any sort of weapon of mass destruction. In October of 1998 the United States congress put together the "Iraq Liberation Act" which was aimed towards the removal of Saddam Hussein with a focus on rebuilding an alliance, with tougher laws, reinstating inspections on military operations, and support for the pro-democracy group, the Iraqi National Congress. On our entering into Iraq in 2003, the search for "WMD's" was on. But the search resulted in nothing, no sign of WMD building, and no good has come from it. According to reports based on the election of George W. Bush, the topic of the first Security Council Meeting was to discuss plans on the possible invasion in Iraq. This seems to be a continuation of what George Sr.'s administration wanted, even though Bush Sr. was against invading Iraq.

Since George W. has become president there has been a rather large decrease in many rights we gained from the Constitution of the United States of America. We no longer live privately. Information was leaked in December of 2005, that the president had been wiretapping phones and Internet for information on terrorism. This led to what became known as the NSA Warrant-less Surveillance Controversy. Several people accused the president of listening in on their calls, which violated both certain parts of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the constitution. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act "prescribes procedures for requesting judicial authorization for electronic surveillance and physical search of persons engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States on behalf of a foreign power"(http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/). He argued that these actions were necessary to keep the US safe from other terrorist attacks, and could also lead to the arrest of infamous terrorists responsible for 9/11. At a press interview about the monitoring president Bush said that Congress should renew the Patriot act, which would give the president, government, and military all authority to do what they must to put an end to terrorism. The president also said that he "expected a "full investigation" into who leaked information about the wiretap program" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/ 4542880.stm). "He spoke of it again when he met with reporters New Year's Day after a visit with wounded soldiers in his home state of Texas. 'We're at war, and as the commander-in-chief I have to use the resources at my disposal within the law to protect the American people,' said President Bush, 'and that is what we are doing'"( http://voanews.com/english/archive/2006-01/2006-01-01 voa34.cfm?CFID=72781994 &CFTOKEN=47959667, Paula Wolfson).

Although there seems to be no way around pulling out without leaving certain dangers in Iraq, like the thought of more terrorism, every day an estimated 100 civilians and soldiers die a day. This war is seen to be one that cannot be won, and will be never-ending. "The situation in Iraq is deteriorating, maybe even spiraling out of control towards all out civil war. The insurgency movement in Iraq is growing, making nation building on the part of America and its allies ineffective…Casualty counts, both civilian and military, are on the rise and expensive, but delicate, military hardware is grinding to a halt under the stress of combat in such a rugged environment. America has poured vast sums of its fortune into Iraq, hoping to kick-start a new nation. On the home front and throughout the world, support for the war is waning" (http://www.ivaw.org/node/423, Vic Blazier). For this and the many other reasons above, the US must pull out of Iraq before this becomes a full out war against America.

Any candidate who is willing to change this, is alright with me.

Share this post on:

 •    •    •    •    •