Making it personal

“Showdown With Iraq,” “Confronting Iraq,” is what the headlines on CNN and The Washington Post are stating. For whatever reason our president has for taking military action, war always becomes personal. We were a country trying to defeat terrorism, and now President George W. Bush is reporting to the American people that we are preparing for war with Iraq. Bush is convinced that there is some connection with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and the al Qaeda terrorist group. During Bush’s State of the Union address, he strongly pointed this out. In an article titled, “Bush: Iraq, al Qaeda linked” posted on www.CNN.com, reporters quoted the president saying, “He is a danger not only to countries in the region, but as I explained last night, because of his al Qaeda connections, because of his history, he is a danger to Americans. And we’re going to deal with him.”

Whether Saddam is linked to al Qaeda, Bush is determined to stop him. Another reason for this is because of Hussein’s past. Or should I say his past with former President George Bush? Could George W. Bush be taking this situation to a personal level? If he is or if he isn’t, the decision to go to war becomes personal. If not personal for the political leaders of opposing nations, then personal for the innocent lives that reside in these countries and the countless number of people who defend their countrymen.

Associated Press writers Edith Lederer and Dafna Linzer wrote in The Washington Post the article “U.S. Fails to Sway Allies on Iraq,” which reported that the United States does not have much international support on the Iraqi issue.

“At a council meeting a day after President Bush’s State of the Union speech, 11 out of 15 members supported giving more time to weapons inspectors to pursue Iraq’s peaceful disarmament — France, Russia and China who all have veto power as well as Germany, Pakistan, council diplomats told The Associated Press. Only Bulgaria and Spain backed the United States and Britain in focusing on Iraq’s failures rather than continued inspections.”

Recent reports from Chief United Nations Weapons Inspector Hans Blix claims Iraq is planning to construct nuclear weapons. There are also complaints by U.N. inspectors that Iraq has not provided proof that they have diminished all their weapons of mass destruction. This is leading inspectors to believe that Iraq is still hiding something. The Bush administration and Blix are pushing for some type of evidence that will prove Saddam is operating against the United States. However, the lack of support from other countries demonstrates that a peaceful decision can be implemented. The council members of these countries are fully aware of what could be if Bush decides to choose war.

There is no doubt that an attack on Iraq will bring disaster to the Middle East and it’s people. American citizens must realize this disaster can be resulted upon us as well. This notion is something we Americans were exposed to Sept. 11. With nuclear warfare being an option for several countries including Iraq, the protection of our citizens diminishes. In the past, war concludes with personal strife. However, the armed forces will not be the only ones fighting the battles. Rumoring threats about diseases, such as smallpox, keep us paranoid that maybe one day a devastating plague will creep into our nation. And this will be our fight.

If Bush and his administration fail to seek peaceful talk with Iraq, the chances of an attack will lie moments away. It is likely that more civilians in both nations will be affected greatly. The idea of using nuclear weapons to destroy a population is no longer unimaginable. If this war on Iraq or this war on terrorism, as Bush claims it to be, is won, does the winner really win? Are the defeated the only ones who will cry?

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply