Who
Supports President Bush?
by
Lawrence McGuire
Dissident Voice
March 8, 2003
On
Thursday March 6, 2003 U.S. President George Bush stated:
"I believe (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein is a
threat to the American people. I believe he's a threat to the neighborhood in
which he lives," Bush said, listing how the Iraqi regime has invaded
neighboring countries and poisoned its own people. (http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/07/sprj.irq.main/index.html)
As I have pointed out in a
previous article (IS IRAQ A THREAT TO THE U.S.? http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles/McGuire_Iraq.htm),
according to the available evidence Saddam Hussein is not a threat to the
American people. However already in
2003, 14 Iraqi civilians have died because of U.S. and British bombing in Iraq.
(http://www.iraqbodycount.net/bodycount.htm).
Thousands more Iraqi
civilians are expected to die in the attack on Iraq. The U.S. military strategists have announced a strategy of ‘Shock
and Awe’ which they themselves compare to the attack on Hiroshima:
“If the Pentagon sticks to its current war plan, one
day in March the Air Force and Navy will launch between 300 and 400 cruise
missiles at targets in Iraq. As CBS News Correspondent David Martin reports,
this is more than number that were launched during the entire 40 days of the
first Gulf War.
On the second day, the plan
calls for launching another 300 to 400 cruise missiles.
"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad,"
said one Pentagon official who has been briefed on the plan.
"The sheer size of this has never been seen
before, never been contemplated before," the official said.
The battle plan is based on
a concept developed at the National Defense University. It's called "Shock
and Awe" and it focuses on the psychological destruction of the enemy's
will to fight rather than the physical destruction of his military forces.
"We want them to quit. We want them not to
fight," says Harlan Ullman, one of the authors of the Shock and Awe
concept which relies on large numbers of precision guided weapons.
"So that you have this simultaneous effect,
rather like the nuclear weapons at Hiroshima, not taking days or weeks but in
minutes," says Ullman.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/24/eveningnews/main537928.shtml.
The United States also plans
to use chemical weapons against Iraqi civilians, weapons that are banned by the
chemical weapons convention: “The US
is preparing to use the toxic riot-control agents CS gas and pepper spray in
Iraq in contravention of the Chemical Weapons Convention, provoking the first
split in the Anglo-US alliance. "Calmative" gases, similar to the one
that killed 120 hostages in the Moscow theatre siege last year, could also be
employed. The convention bans the use
of these toxic agents in battle, not least because they risk causing an
escalation to full chemical warfare.” (source, The Independent, UK, US Prepares to Use Toxic Gases in Iraq by
Geoffrey Lean and Severin Carrell http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0302-03.htm)
The United States also plans
to use cluster bombs, which spread lethal ‘bomblets’ over a wide area and often
do not explode on impact, but act as unexploded land mines. In Kuwait, since the 1991 Gulf War : “By the end of 2002, nearly 2,000 people had
been killed or injured by exploding bombs which had been accidentally triggered
by Kuwaitis. Often the people killed by unexploded bomblets from cluster bombs
are children. (The Guardian, UK, http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0228-01.htm).
According to the United
Nations: “…at least 10 million people
could run out of food within six weeks of the start of hostilities if they did
not receive emergency aid.” (Washington Post, Feb. 23, http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0228-06.htm).
Remember that Iraq is a
small country of 22 million people, half of whom are children.
The Toronto Star reported
this: “A United Nations report leaked
earlier this year suggested 500,000 Iraqi civilians could die in a U.S.-led
attempt to topple Saddam. A study by the International Physicians for the
Prevention of Nuclear War estimated that 100,000 Iraqi civilians might
die.” (Toronto Star, February 28, 2003 http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0228-09.htm)
This report from the United
Nations also reports: "In the
event of a crisis, 30 percent of children under 5 would be at risk of death
from malnutrition" [p. 3(5)]. With 4.2 million children under five in Iraq
[p. 3(5)], this represents 1.26 million children under five.” To read this United Nations report go here: http://www.casi.org.uk/pr/pr030217.html
President Bush claims Saddam
Hussein is a threat to Iraq’s neighbors.
In fact ALL of the countries who share borders with Iraq are opposed to
this war, leaders AND citizens.
In Turkey last week the
Turkish Parliament voted against allowing the U.S. to use its territory as a
base for attacking Iraq. While they
voted a huge anti-war demonstration was occurring outside in the streets. Over 90% of Turkish civilians are opposed to
this war.
Also last weekend the Arab
League, a group of 22 countries which includes Syria, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia,
all neighbors of Iraq, voted UNANIMOUSLY to oppose this war. This is from the Associated Press story about
their meeting:
SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt - Here
are the main points of the final communique from Saturday's summit of leaders
of the 22-member Arab League, as read by Secretary-General Amr Moussa. Arab leaders registered "complete
rejection to any aggression on Iraq or threatening the security of any Arab
country and considering it a threat to Arab national security and (reiterate)
the necessity of resolving the Iraqi issue through peaceful ways."
* Called for giving weapons
inspectors enough time carry out their mission and called on inspectors to use
objectivity in their work.
* Called on Arab countries
to refrain from "participating in any military action that targets the
security, safety and unity of Iraq or any other Arab country." (Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030301/ap_wo_en_ge/me_gen_arabs_iraq_communique_1)
The Non-aligned Movement, a
group of 116 countries, met in late February and issued a strong statement
opposed to this war : “We believe that
the peaceful resolution of the Iraqi crisis would ensure that the Security
Council will also be in a position to ensure Iraq's sovereignty and the
inviolability of its territorial integrity, political independence and
security, and compliance with Paragraph 14 of its Resolution 687 on the
establishment in the Middle East of a weapons of mass destruction free zone,
which includes Israel.” (Source: http://www.nam2003.com/events/newnam2003/readspeech.shtml?declare/dc2202_iraq)
In the United Nations
Security Council, France, Germany, Russia, and China, have all stated
opposition to this war.
Although the Spanish leader
Aznar is a supporter of this war, in Spain over three million citizens marched
against the war on February 15, the biggest anti-war march in Spanish history.
Although the Britsh leader
Blair is a supporter of this war, over one million people marched against this
war in London on February 15th, the biggest anti-war march in British history.
In the United States,
hundreds of thousands marched against the war on February 15th, with huge demos
in New York City (400,000) and in San Francisco (200,000). Last Wednesday, March 5, 2003, thousands of
high school and university students all over the world walked out of classes in
opposition to this war, including tens of thousands in the United States
itself.
Also in the United States,
133 cities have passed resolutions opposing this war: (Source: http://www.citiesforpeace.org)
Direct action against the
war is occurring daily in Italy, where people are blocking trains loaded with
American military equipment, in England, where people are entering American
military bases, in Ireland, where people are attacking U.S. military aircraft
with hatchets and hammers.
A war against Iraq without
United Nations approval would be a violation of the United Nations Charter and
a violation of International Law.
(Rueters News Service, March 6, 2003, http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0306-13.htm)
In order to pressure other
countries to support a UN resolution for war against Iraq the U.S. Government
is illegally spying on Security Council Members (The Observer, UK, http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,905936,00.html).
But this story is being ignored in the U.S. media: (Media Dodging U.N. Surveillance Story http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0306-12.htm).
According to Coleen Rowley
(the FBI agent, who courageously pointed out last year that the Bush
Administration had ignored warning signals about Sept. 11th,) the war against
Iraq will increase the chances of terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens:
“She said that many of her
colleagues share her view that an American invasion of Iraq would result in a
wave of new domestic terrorist attacks by Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups
and that the F.B.I. was ill-prepared to deal with the new threat.” (Source, New
York Times, March 6, 2003
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0306-06.htm)
Almost all the religious
leaders in the world oppose this war, including the Pope, and the Archbishop of
the Anglican church in England (New York Times, March 2003 http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0306-03.htm,
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Hans Blix, today (March 7,
2003 http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/03/07/sprj.irq.un.transcript.blix/index.html)
in
his report to the Security
Council, said this:
“How much time would it take to resolve the key remaining
disarmament tasks? While cooperation can -- cooperation can and is to be
immediate, disarmament, and at any rate verification of it, cannot be instant.
Even with a proactive Iraqi attitude induced by continued outside pressure, it
will still take some time to verify sites and items, analyze documents,
interview relevant persons and draw conclusions. It will not take years, nor
weeks, but months.”
Notice he said
‘months’. Yet already there is a new
resolution proposed by the United States and Great Britain and Spain to set an
ultimatum of March 17th for Iraq to be completely disarmed or be invaded.
Who supports this proposed
massive assault on a civilian population, which will result in thousands if not
millions of civilian casualties and more terrorist attacks against U.S.
citizens?
And why do they support it?
In my view the Bush
Administration is going to war in order to control oil resources, to benefit
U.S. oil companies and armament manufacturers, and to divert attention away
from the huge economic problems currently facing the United States.
The issue of weapons of mass
destruction is a pretext for a war of aggression.
The news from the United
States today is about the number of Americans without health insurance: “An estimated 75 million Americans were
without health insurance at some point during the last two years, amounting to
nearly a third of all Americans younger than 65, a study has found.” (March 5, 2003 by the New York Times http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0305-04.htm)
Over 300,000 people lost
their jobs in February.
(http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/030307/economy_jobs_10.html)
Corporations with close ties
to the Bush Administration will make millions of dollars (from taxpayers) as a
result of this war:
HOUSTON, March 6 (Reuters
News Service) - A Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR)
has won the contract to oversee any firefighting operations at Iraqi oilfields
after any U.S.-led invasion, a Defense Department source said on Thursday.
KBR was widely viewed by
many in the oilfield services industry as the likely candidate to oversee
firefighting in Iraq's oilfields. Halliburton does extensive logistic support
work for the U.S. military.
Vice President Dick Cheney
served as Halliburton's chief executive officer from 1995 to 2000.
Forbes magazine says it
pretty clearly:
“Who would be likely to get juicy deals in postwar
Iraq? None of the big American or British oil companies are there. But if a
U.S.-led force succeeds in ousting Saddam, it's a good bet that these companies
will come in as soon as the fighting has died down.” (http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2002/1028/126.html).
I watched some of the U.N.
Security Council meeting today on c-span.
Nowhere in all the grand words I heard from all those different
diplomats did I hear mention of the innocent Iraqi civilians who will die if a
war occurs.
Yes Saddam Hussein is a
dictator. The U.S., with the help of
Great Britain, France, Russia, Germany, and some other countries sitting at the
table of the United Nations security council, helped him become a dictator, and
helped him remain in power. They helped
him acquire the weapons of mass destruction which they now are helping
destroy. And innocent Iraqi civilians
have paid the price, and will pay a greater price if war comes. Should we support a war against people who
are not threatening us, who cannot threaten us, and who live under a
dictatorship that we helped create?
And, at the risk of being redundant I emphasize, this war will kill
thousands and thousands of Iraqi civilians, just like the first Gulf War
did. And perhaps at the end of it
Saddam Hussein will be flown to a plush retirement home in Saudi Arabia. Who knows?
Surely it is time for normal
people all over the world to take whatever political action they can to change
the way human society resolves conflict.
This war, like all wars, is about greed and power. Isn’t it time for us to change? If not now, when?
This weekend, for
International Women’s Day, there is an anti-war march in Washington, DC led and
organized by women: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?list=sub&sub=16
Men are welcome to attend!
For more anti-war
information I recommend:
Lawrence McGuire is the author of The
Great American Wagon Road. He lives in France and can
be reached at: blmcguire@hotmail.com