3/8/03: Ten Groups Opposing An Iraq Invasion

Like all wars, this one resulted in many unintended consequences. 

I made the following points in a letter published in the Daily News-Record 18 years ago today:

Editor, DNR:

Here is my list of the top ten U.S. groups opposed to the use of bombs and missiles to depose Saddam Hussein:

1. Followers of Jesus: There are many fellow-believers in Iraq who are our friends and who will find themselves in grave danger. As to our enemies, we are under orders to love them, not kill them. 

2. Pro-peace advocates: Let’s stop resorting to unspeakably barbaric ways of dealing with human conflicts.

3. Pro-life advocates: Countless numbers of unborn children will be murdered, and even more of those already born will suffer and die.

4. Pro-Israel advocates: Further turmoil in the region could further threaten Israel’s security.

5. Environmentalists: The planet can’t afford this kind of devastation and misuse of its resources.

6. Isolationists: We’ve got enough problems at home, and shouldn’t use our defense forces to stir up trouble half a world away.

7. Internationalists: Moving forward without stronger support from the UN and other allies will only weaken our much needed influence around the world.

8. Eternal optimists: Saddam, like our former archenemy Fidel, is advancing in years and won’t be around forever. And there are far less costly ways of containing him.

9. Die-hard pessimists: Nothing will go as planned, and we could be getting ourselves into another Vietnam.

10. Fiscal conservatives: It’s irresponsible to spend $100 billion we don’t have on this kind of blitzkrieg--and that is if all goes as planned. It may cost untold billions more to win this war and to keep the peace.

*********************************************

As usual, all efforts of peace-minded people around the world to avoid war in Iraq were ignored, including the following note I sent to my senators and congressperson:

I am deeply troubled by the prospect of the U.S. using massive weapons of terror and destruction in an effort to prevent Iraq from developing nuclear and other weapons of terror and destruction. 

Some of the sad ironies involved are that the invading country in this case, the US 1) is the only nation in the world to have itself engaged in nuclear warfare, 2) presently owns the world’s largest and most deliverable stockpile of nuclear weapons, 3) is pursuing ever closer diplomatic and trade relationships with all of the other current nuclear powers, 4) spends (or misspends) a military budget of over ten times that of all of its enemy nations combined, in spite of growing famine and other world needs, 5) earlier supported Saddam Hussein as an ally at a time when he was committing acts of genocide against his own people, 6) has a history of actively supporting regimes with dismal human rights records (including others not complying with clear U.N. resolutions), 7) is relying on rumors and on sometimes outdated aerial photos to justify its current action and, saddest of all, 8) continues to give lip service to the Prince of Peace, one who refused to resort to force even to protect himself and his followers--or to liberate his own native land from foreign oppression.

Please vote No to a U.S. invasion of Iraq.