 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
 |
|
|
|
To perform a search, click on ==> Search
 The Rush to War
by Nic Samojluk
The Daughter of all WarsYou probably remember that Saddam Hussein labeled the Gulf War as the Mother of all Wars. This is why I am labeling the current war against Iraq as the Daughter of all Wars, since the genesis of the current conflict with Iraq can be traced to the conflict that took place over a decade ago. Saddam made a futile attempt to avoid being the target of the current conflict by a non-ending series of dilatory tactics, and finally by proposing that he and Bush engage in what the press described as the Mother of all Debates, but the American president responded with the Mother of all Bombs.George Bush was raised in a Christian environment and must be pretty familiar with some of the passages found in the last book of the Bible where there is an allusion to an apocalyptic conflict in what today is the country of Iraq, and he must have given his final approval for this conflict with fear and trepidation, hoping that the war he was about to start was not the one described in said apocalyptic sacred writings where we find the following scary description about what the holy man of God predicted under prophetic inspiration: “’Release the four angels who are bound at the great Euphrates.’ So the four angels were released, who had been held ready for the hour, the day, the month, and the year, to kill a third of humankind.” “The sixth angel poured his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water dried up in order to prepare the way for the kings from the east” “They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon.” “Both the Hebrew ‘Abaddon’ and the Greek ‘Apollyon’ mean ‘destroyer,’ which is also one of the meanings of the name ‘Saddam.’”
The Rush to War In spite of the undeniable initial success of the coalition forces advancing toward Baghdad, the capital of Iraq; and regardless of the fact that recent polls indicate that the American population support for the war effort has jumped to seventy-one percent, the opposition to this preemptive strike against Iraq is still significant, and many are convinced that American action reveals a Rush to War attitude by the Bush administration. There is a Global Outcry Against the War, Naked Anti-War Demonstrations, the Pope Urges Fast for Peace, George Bush gets a worse press than Saddam Hussein; and while the War Draws Condemnation around the world, those who support the coalition to divest Saddam of his alleged weapons of mass destruction interpret the peacemakers action as a March to Save Saddam, they remind us that 289 Million Americans Avoid Peace Rallies, that there are both Rallies for and Against the War, that there are 30 Countries Supporting the War Effort, and that the Human Shields quit Baghdad when they learned that instead of protecting hospitals they had been assigned by Saddam for the protection of military installations.Many Americans can’t understand the attitude of Europeans, and especially that of France, who seem to ignore the great sacrifice American soldiers made for their freedom half a century ago. Americans wish all Europeans would imitate Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, who expressed his gratitude for what American did for Europe in the past: We will never forget, he said, that we owe our freedom, our wealth, and our democracy to the United States of America. And we will never forget that there have been many American young lives that were lost who sacrificed themselves for us. For this reason, some American restaurants have renamed French fries as ‘Freedom Fries,’ a reaction which was copied by the U.S. House of Representatives cafeterias. Some have suggested with irony that “The French will always be our friends whenever they need us,” and that we have a new “axis”: that of France, Germany, and Russia. One columnist writer expressed his frustration as follows: We Call Them Our European Cousins, but I Demand a DNA Test! Another writer argued that the European Union Says Iraq Must Disarm Quickly, but they are willing to wait forever for that to happen, ignoring the fact that Saddam is a master manipulator and is oblivious to diplomacy bereft of a military show of force.
The New Just War Doctrine
One of the reasons Bush has had such a hard time to sell his war against Iraq is the fact that he seems to be advancing a new war doctrine based on preemption. In his address to the U.S. Congress, after the terrorist’s attack on 9/11, Bush clearly stated that he was not going to wait for the next attack against the U.S., but rather engage in a proactive, preemptive action against both terrorists organizations and countries who harbor terrorists. Since Iraq has been sponsoring terrorist activities in the Middle East by making direct payments to the families of Palestinians suicide bombers, and since Iraq had engaged in the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction, he felt that Saddam’s country was a legitimate target for his war on terror, fearing that sooner or later the Iraqi despot would succumb to the temptation of selling said fearful weapons to the terrorists organizations he has such strong affinity with. This is why he included Iraq in his “axis of evil” group of nations, but he was unable to establish a direct link between the 9/11 terrorist action and Saddam.The big question is: Is it ethical to declare war against a country that has not taken military action against us? Bush’s answer to this question was a resounding “Yes,” but the rest of the world had serious misgivings about this. Bush argued that waiting for a second terrorist strike might be irresponsible, since weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists could kill and maim millions. Besides, he felt that Iraq had undeniably violated the peace agreement signed at the end of the Gulf War, and had ignored 17 U.N. resolutions issued against Iraq since then. He also felt that the U.S. had to finish the task his father had started when he sent the U.S. soldiers to liberate Kuwait over a decade ago. If Iraq continued ignoring the many demands that he disarm, the costly Gulf War might have been fought in vain, since Saddam would be tempted to use his weapons of mass destructions against his neighbors again, and unless stopped, it would be too costly to do so once he acquired nuclear capability. Those who agree with this emphasize The UN’s Moral Irrelevance, with its unwillingness to back its resolutions with anything but just another warning, and its questionable wisdom of assigning the leadership of the Human Rights Commission to Libya, the nation responsible for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 that claimed the lives of 270 innocent victims in 1988.Evidently there is no clear-cut and simple answer to the Question: Can a Preemptive War be Ethical, and it is not easy to determine whether the War With Iraq (is) Morally Justified? Former President Carter expressed his strong opposition to any military against Iraq. He is convinced that the U.S. Administration Plans didn’t Meet His Criteria for a ‘Just War.’ While Legal Experts Scour(ed) Old Resolutions, and others wondered: Is War with Iraq the Judgment of God? Both the U.S., Great Britain, Spain, and the other coalition members prepared for what seemed unavoidable: war against Saddam Hussein, and they let the rest of the world ponder the Logic of War. Jack Straw, Great Britain Foreign Secretary, emphasized his conviction that the war against Saddam Hussein was legal, but those who opposed such military action were questioning not only the legality of such a move, but also the morality of engaging in such a risky project which was bound to result in the death of thousands of innocent victims, including the loss of coalition soldiers. Therefore the questions remains: Was This War Necessary?
The Price of WarAs soon as Americans realized that the Bush administration was serious about a military confrontation with Iraq, experts began to search for an answer to the following question: What’s a War Cost these Days? It didn’t take long for the answer to appear: War May Cost the U.S. Ninety-Five Billion Dollars, which represents a sizable sum of money which the American taxpayers will have to pay, but the same experts immediately warned that the war could be cheaper than peaceful inaction. Whatever this price might be in terms of dollars and cents, what shall we say about the priceless irreparable loss of human lives? On March 24 Fox News reported Nine Marines Killed & 12 Soldiers Missing, and the same day the Washington Post announced the public Display of Five U.S. Prisoners of War on Iraqi state television, and the following day Fox News disclosed that Five Hundred Iraqis had been killed in two days of fighting. If this is just the beginning, what will be the eventual cost in human lives when the war is finally over? Those who justify the U.S. action try to balance this cost against the future loss of lives in the event of another 9/11 like terrorist attack with weapons provided by Saddam, the suffering due to the Iraq’s Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners, and the loss of lives in Palestine due to the activities of Homicide bombers sponsored by Saddam Hussein.
The Price of Another War I have a hard time ending this report without making reference to the cost in human lives of another war that has been going on for the last three decades. I am talking about the American war against the unborn. When three thousand innocent human civilians were mercilessly sacrificed on 9/11, the whole world was horrified as they watched the New York Twin Towers crumble and fall enveloped in a ball of fire and smoke. Nevertheless, the same number of innocent human beings are either poisoned or dismembered, not every September 11, but every weekend, and almost nobody is morally disturbed. On January 22 it was Happy Anniversary for forty-five million Americans who missed their birthday because their mothers decided to let an abortion executioner murder their unborn children. Did America mourn their death? A few did, but many celebrated with Planned Parenthood the 30th Anniversary of Roe Versus Wade, which legalized the genocide of the unborn and allowed unscrupulous physicians to profit from this devilish business by selling the “beheaded and mutilated” babies’ organs for scientific research.But this is not all. Dr. Pete singer, a Princeton professor, is not happy with the current women’s freedom. He “advocates the right to kill babies up to 30 days after birth.” Those who sympathize with his position remind us that he is very compassionate towards animals, as his book “Animal Rights” indicates. He may not get his wish, because public opinion has been turning away from abortion, and the U.S. Senate has recently approved a ban on the ‘Partial-Birth’ Abortion procedure, which was designed to allow abortionists to get a higher price for the sale of baby organs after they are killed moments prior to their birth. Another victory was gained by the opponents of abortion when the Supreme Court overturned the Racketeering Conviction of Anti-Abortion Groups. Another Abortion Bill Would Require Women to Obtain a Death Warrant prior to an abortion. Research on cloning is also on the butcher’s block as the following headlines indicate: House Votes to Ban All Human Cloning, and Cloning countdown. There is even a Debate on Classifying Fetus as Unborn Child, which would offer certain legal rights for the unborn and entitle them for medical care. And you might have read that Bishop William K. Weigand of Sacramento has recently challenged California Governor Davis by suggesting that he should abstain from receiving Holy Communion due to his pro-abortion stance. If this trend continues, some women might be tempted to move to Canada “where there is socialized medicine” and there is less opposition to abortion. The problem is that although “You can get an abortion there … but the waiting list is nine months.”
March 27/2003
 Free Mailing List Club!
If you would like to be on our SDA Forum Mailing List, please take a minute to sign up today and join hundreds of others who have done already so. It is free, and you will have the choice of unsuscribing at will. We do not share, nor do we sell your E-mail to others.
|
|
| |
|
|
