The Rush to War

Submitted by Sharon Fentress (United States), Apr 4, 2003 at 16:52

Dear Mr. Pipes,

I enjoy your writings, and thank you for the opportunity to learn more about God's people in the Middle East.

I will, however, disagree that the "left" are the only ones protesting this upresidented "rush to war" by the U.S. First, let me say, we are all supporting our brave troops in their quest to "liberate Iraq". Most protestors are not disagreeing with the reason for attacking Iraq, but with the failure of the U.S. to use diplomacy in a last ditch effort to save lives, and the less than scrupulous way in which the administrtion went about the quest to war. One need only remember Bush #1's statement after the election "I am everyone's president whether they like it or not" to wonder if that extended beyond his nonsupporters here in the U.S. to nations.

I respectfully disagree with your statement: "If the Iraqis want to get rid of Saddam, let us discreetly encourage them while making it absolutely clear they are on their own." Mr. Pipes, this was tried and failed. In 1991, former president Bush (Bush #1) encouraged an Iraqi insurrection against Hussein, and walked-out, leaving thousands of Iraqi citizens dead at the hands of Saddam Hussein.

You were right in your assertion that Hussein will use "friends" to achieve the means to his end. Obviously, the U.S. was not aware of his personality flaws or his pathetic upbringing early-on or if we were, it was of no consequence when we:

-brought Hussein to power by a CIA-led coup in the late 60's.

-supplied Hussein (Iraq) with muniltions and weapons of mass distruction (WMDs) in 80's to use against Iran.

The problem with Islamic fundamentalism is not that it is looking for violence, it's that once scorned it will stop at nothing to avenge its people, country, religion.

The "rush to war", as many call it, gives the appearance of being exactly that. Iraq citizens have been scourged by Hussein for thrity years, why after thrity years would this administration become interested in the well-being of Iraqi citizens and bypass

-the U.N.
-its allies,
-U.N. inspectors
-laws and treatys
-world opinion
-the Pope's recommendations of dialog,

to take upon themselves the task of removing an "imminent threat", an imminent threat the administration has yet to prove. Iraq's capabilities are not of such high caliber as to be an imminent threat to the U.S.


While most would like to believe that Islamic fundamentalists were the cause of 9/11, it only answers the who and not the why. There was someting that had to be avenged, but what?

Why would this great, free world nation, the U.S:

-risk even more lives knowing full-well that a hundred more terrorists will rise-up to avenge their people.

-start a build-up of troops and weapons long before U.N. inspectors were expected to complete their work.

-withold informion on critical weapons sites from U.N. inspectors until the last minute that, according to Sen. Carl Levin, Chariman of the Armed Services Committee this year, greatly impeding precious time needed to inspect?

-promote war with Iraq when North Korea's, Kim issued primal screams almost daily of all-out war, a first strike against our troops in South Korea, and whose nuclear capabilities far exceed those of Iraq and would most definately pose more of an imminent threat than Iraq?

-switch from their "war on terrorism" and bin Laden (who has never been caught) to "liberating Iraq".


We are a peaceful nation and peaceful people, willing to send our troops to help others under seige, or invasion. Why are American citizens, now, supposed to suddenly support an administration that attacks another nation. We've been given every exuse possible...imminent threat, WMDs, regime change, liberating the people, and it still doesn't jibe. Again, Iraq has been under Hussein for thirty years...why war, and why now?

-Why the World Trade Center?
-Why was the World Trade Center attacked not once, but twice?
-Why did the first attack occur within a couple of months of Bush #1 leaving office as president of the U.S.?
-Why did the second attack occur while Bush #2 was president?
-Why was Bush #1, an advisor with the Carlyle Group (controlling $14 billions in assests around the world including the Middle East and Asia, and often referred to on internet site headlines as, "The Axis of Corporate Evil" that have purportedly linked Carlyle to everything from Enron to Al/Qaeda) meeting with bin Laden's brother on 9/10, the day before the 9/11 attacks?
-Why did VP Cheney (former CEO of Halliburton, with ties to the Pentagon, receiving a pension of $1 thousand- to $1million-a-year, and holding stock options lie on talk show television about Halliburton's subsidiary ties to Iraq, Iran and Libya?
-Why was Halliburton chosen to handle oil well fires in Iraq? They are not the only business, as we know from Kuwait, that manages oil well fires.
-Why have Barbara Bush and Alma Powell socialized with Princess Haifa al-Faisal wife of Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S., a known supporter of 9/11 terrorists?

Again, I ask why the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and probably the White House, if not for the brave actions of our American citizens.

Yes, there are way to many questions for the administration to answer, and American citizens should demand honest answers before supporting any administraton, especially one that risks the lives of men, women, and children, in its rush to war.

Keep us the good work.
Peace to you, and God Bless the World and our brave soldiers.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".