US should not attack Iraq

Forrester, you are WRONG when you say that there is evidence that shows Saddam’s involvement with Al-Qaeda. There is none. You say you get your “information from a wealth of sources?” Fine. Show me any evidence that proves Saddam has ties with Al-Qaeda or has any indirect involvement in the atrocities of 9-11. Give me ONE evidence. After all, like you said, you only form an opinion based on information. You formed an opinion. You showcased it. Now tell me where you got the information from. For your info, I did not use an analogy to make my case. I used it to show my view in a lighthearted and quite frankly entertaining matter. You found it idiotic, Forrester? I say your words are idiotic. You are missing the big picture. No one asked you if Saddam is an evil man. No one asked you if Saddam invaded his neighbor or gassed his own people. First of all, it has been more than ten years since he has done both, but that is besides my point. You are blind to what is going on. The United States of America has never attacked a country first. It has always attacked the country of aggression. This applies to Japan in World War II (the bombing of Pearl Harbor) as it does to Saddam in the Gulf War (the invasion of Kuwait). Now for the first time in our history we are debating whether or not we should change our longstanding policy, and all you can tell me is that Saddam is evil. That he invaded his neighbor. More than ten years ago. That he gassed his own people. More than ten years ago. Do you not know that FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack before they attacked Pearl Harbor? He had specific intelligence, although he did not know exactly where the attack was going to be. Do you know what history tells us? History tells us FDR turned to his close advisor and told him that the United States has a longstanding history of a certain reputation (you can figure it out yourself) and that they must stand on that reputation. FDR waited and you know the rest. My question is: What has changed? Why do we, the greatest military might in the history of mankind, have to attack another nation that has an army of soldiers that have enlisted out of fear and not loyalty, a country that cannot possibly defend itself and is so poor that thousands of the kids living there have starved to death, all the while killing thousands of civilians - and all because one man is evil? Or because he invaded his neighbor over ten years ago? Or because he gassed his own people over ten years ago? If you have the answer Forrester I would really like to know. Believe me when I say I would like nothing more than to know. Yes, Forrester, you are right, this isn’t a matter of Saddam’s refusal to follow the various United Nations Resolutions and Codes. But that is the case we are using to attack him. Don’t forget that under Stalin’s reign 20 million Russians were killed. Stalin had weapons of mass destruction. We didn’t attack him. What makes Saddam different? What makes the situation in Iraq different? Is it because a pro-U.S. puppet regime would give us access to its oil? Or is it because today is September of 2002 and Congressional elections are coming up in November 5th? Or is it both? Forrester, let us be clear here on the term ‘weapons of mass destruction’, because those words are being used to manipulate Americans in favor of the war. Yes, Saddam has biological and chemical weapons. Yes, these are technically weapons of mass destruction. Yes, we know he has them because we gave most of them to him. But don’t tell me he has weapons of mass destruction because you know damn well (or don’t) that the term will be confused with nuclear weapons. Saddam does not have nuclear weapons, and if he does our Commander-In-Chief has not given us adequate evidence to demonstrate as such. It is very easy to obtain the intelligence to prove that another nation is developing a nuclear bomb. Besides the obvious methods such as taking satellite photos, there are many ways to determine the fact. For example, we can measure the electrical output of Iraq, as a nuclear bomb requires unfathomable amounts of energy. Where is the evidence? Forrester, Saddam wins if we attack Iraq. He will be a downright success. Not only will he have forced us to change our longstanding policy and engage in preemptive strike, but he will have crushed our coalition in the real war on terror. He will have ushered in a new breed and generation of terrorists who will have yet another reason to call our country an aggressive superpower. He will have forced us to waste our resources to fight on two fronts and subsequently occupy Baghdad for many years, all the while creating new Bin Ladens who will turn to terror tactics to drive us out of Iraq as they are doing in response to our troops beings stationed in Saudi ground, which they see as sacred Islamic land. He will have forced the world to cast a shadowy eye on us, and this doesn’t apply only to the Arab world but to our European and other Asian allies as well. If that isn’t Saddam’s perfect revenge for the Gulf War (even though the U.S. will have initiated the revenge by attacking him), then I don’t know what is. On top of all this, the attack will kills thousands of civilians. When thousands of Americans were killed on September 11th, we attacked the Al-Qaeda harbored in Afghanistan by the Taliban. When thousands of Iraqis are dead, innocent men, women, and children, family members will want revenge. It is human nature. And thus even more terrorists are created. They won’t even see it as or call it terrorism. They will see it the same way we see it when we began our military campaign in Afghanistan. Is this in the interest of our country? Besides everything I have mentioned (which doesn’t even cover a quarter of what I have to say), how does America look when we tell just about every country in the world that we are right to attack Iraq? That we know what we are doing? Sure, every other country (except for Israel; even a majority of the British are against the war) in the world is wrong. Only WE are right. Only the greatest nation on earth is right. And when citizens of other countries become anti-American we simply label it jealousy…Let me end by saying that if we attack Iraq I will think twice before waving the American flag again, even though I am a proud American. Just imagine an Iraqi dad living in Baghdad. Imagine him waking up one night after hearing a deafening roar and feeling a great tremble. Imagine him grabbing his wife and running to his children. Imagine him looking at his son and his daughter and seeing the sweltering fear in their eyes. Imagine him turning to his wife and looking at her, trying to give her a sign of reassurance, even though she will never see one. Imagine the blinding flash coming through their windows and reflecting on their walls. Imagine his daughter asking his dad what is going on, imagine the incomprehensible fear and confusion in her voice. And then imagine the dad wetting his lips and whispering, “The Americans are here.” 9/11 was a great tragedy. The fact that a country as great as America will be degraded to nothing more than an aggressive monster machine is an even greater one.