Books not bombs. Not in my name. No blood for oil. Opponents of a war with Iraq have used these slogans to voice their opinion. Books instead of bombs is a great idea. Education is the key to success. If you don't want war, then of course not in your name. But no blood for oil? That's where I get lost.
I think that saying it's all about oil is simplistic and accusatory. Is it really only about oil? Is it not about Iraq's continual defiance of international law? Or its threats to sovereign nations or past military moves? Oil does not enter my mind. And to claim the only reason the president wants war is to get oil, well sorry--you've been mistaken.
Is it even fair to use the oil argument? How many of those who complain use oil-based products? That's what I thought. And if we go in and Saddam blows the fields, who gets blamed for the environmental disaster? Bush does. But if we go in and secure those fields right away, everyone will claim, \See? It is about the oil!"" This is irrational.
I do know that there are certain facts surrounding reasons for a war with Iraq, mainly, Iraq's constant mockery of the international community. Those who choose to pass up the facts and rant about oil are ignoring solid evidence.
I find it difficult to support President Bush politically or personally but I feel Morgan Bottner's piece [""An Apparatus of Lies,"" Feb. 25] misconstrues some important issues.
The reality of politics is that there will always be dissent and fortunately our system allows for that to be voiced. But a balance must be struck.
Inherent in our system is the recognition that the Executive branch and the president are privy to information that would be potentially damaging if made public knowledge. As the ""sole organ"" of a representation on an international level, the president maintains wide discretion to, hopefully, make an informed decision. As an elected leader, with an elected same-party Congress, wide latitude is justified.
If anti-war protesters constitute a significant percentage of the population, where was that voice during mid-term elections? Congress represent the most legitimate means of representing public opinion, and are the only check citizens have on the president. To complain about that now... cry me a river!
We maintain the freedom to voice opinions with the ballot box, which is the ideal we champion abroad. To not use that privilege and then complain about it is a disservice to the values you seek to uphold.
