John Whitehead's Commentary
Is Iraq a Paper Tiger?
When the news broke that President Bush had given the CIA the go-ahead to "take out" Saddam Hussein, the U.S. press reported it as a major piece of news. But Hussein's high-ranking leaders didn't seem surprised that the White House wanted their president dead, buried and out of the way.
In fact, there seemed to be many outside the U.S. who weren't surprised at the news at all, let alone supportive of the idea. Even within the U.S., Bush has not gathered much support for his latest show of wartime bravado.
Yet faced with daily headlines about escalating tensions between Israel and Palestine and between India and Pakistan, many are wondering why Bush is flexing his elected muscles in Iraq's direction now, in this peculiarly public fashion.
Since Bush's speech this past January, in which he branded Iraq, along with Iran and North Korea, part of the "axis of evil," Bush has been rather obvious in his attempts to unseat Hussein. But with so many other battles to be waged, one has to wonder why Bush is zeroing in on Iraq right now, especially if BBC News is accurate in reporting that Iraq barely has the military might or sophisticated weaponry necessary to counter a U.S. show of force.
Unfortunately, the impression of America that Bush is giving the international community--that of a well-equipped, well-to-do bully--is not the image we should be fostering among countries already hostile to the U.S.
And unless the Bush Administration has information it's not sharing, Saddam Hussein is nothing more than a paper tiger in this war on terrorism--and a seemingly convenient candidate to play villain to Bush's hyped-up propaganda.
But it is propaganda that Americans seem to be buying--lock, stock and barrel. According to recent polls from a variety of news sources, more than 70 percent of those surveyed approve of the way the president is doing his job. Content to be spoon-fed their hourly intake of breaking news, few Americans are demanding much of our leaders in Washington, D.C. While the U.S. war office cranks out juicy bits of propaganda to set the American public on a straight course for war, even fewer Americans seem to be wondering what's really behind these cocked guns.
Those who dare to pose some valid--if unpopular--sentiments find themselves accused of treason, or worse. For example, one Air Force officer--vice chancellor for student affairs at the Monterey Defense Language Institute--was suspended and could face a court-martial for voicing his opinion that President Bush is using the war on terrorism to muster political support.
In a letter to the Monterey County Herald, Lt. Col. Steve Butler said, "Bush knew about the impending attacks on America.... He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism. His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama."
Butler's words might not have been the wisest, but even the unwise have a First Amendment right to freedom of speech in this country. And all Americans have the right and the responsibility to hold their government accountable for its actions--especially when lives, both young and old, are at stake.
But unless someone starts asking some serious questions--and demanding that our government leaders provide more real answers--we'll soon find ourselves propelled into a war with Iraq at a time when our resources could be better used elsewhere.
If this is truly a just war we are waging, our leaders--and the American people--had better wise up, because there's no room for error on the battlefield.
War talk begets war, and the U.S. needs to be prepared to defend our freedoms whenever they are in peril. So perhaps our leaders need to talk less and strategize more, because when we do enter into war--with Iraq or anyone else--it should be obvious to anyone and everyone why such action is necessary and just. As Teddy Roosevelt so rightly advised, we must "speak softly and carry a big stick."
And in the case of the current administration's recurring threats of war against Iraq, let us hope--for the sake of U.S. foreign policy and the high price of war--that it is not, as Shakespeare so eloquently put it, "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
In fact, there seemed to be many outside the U.S. who weren't surprised at the news at all, let alone supportive of the idea. Even within the U.S., Bush has not gathered much support for his latest show of wartime bravado.
Yet faced with daily headlines about escalating tensions between Israel and Palestine and between India and Pakistan, many are wondering why Bush is flexing his elected muscles in Iraq's direction now, in this peculiarly public fashion.
Since Bush's speech this past January, in which he branded Iraq, along with Iran and North Korea, part of the "axis of evil," Bush has been rather obvious in his attempts to unseat Hussein. But with so many other battles to be waged, one has to wonder why Bush is zeroing in on Iraq right now, especially if BBC News is accurate in reporting that Iraq barely has the military might or sophisticated weaponry necessary to counter a U.S. show of force.
Unfortunately, the impression of America that Bush is giving the international community--that of a well-equipped, well-to-do bully--is not the image we should be fostering among countries already hostile to the U.S.
And unless the Bush Administration has information it's not sharing, Saddam Hussein is nothing more than a paper tiger in this war on terrorism--and a seemingly convenient candidate to play villain to Bush's hyped-up propaganda.
But it is propaganda that Americans seem to be buying--lock, stock and barrel. According to recent polls from a variety of news sources, more than 70 percent of those surveyed approve of the way the president is doing his job. Content to be spoon-fed their hourly intake of breaking news, few Americans are demanding much of our leaders in Washington, D.C. While the U.S. war office cranks out juicy bits of propaganda to set the American public on a straight course for war, even fewer Americans seem to be wondering what's really behind these cocked guns.
Those who dare to pose some valid--if unpopular--sentiments find themselves accused of treason, or worse. For example, one Air Force officer--vice chancellor for student affairs at the Monterey Defense Language Institute--was suspended and could face a court-martial for voicing his opinion that President Bush is using the war on terrorism to muster political support.
In a letter to the Monterey County Herald, Lt. Col. Steve Butler said, "Bush knew about the impending attacks on America.... He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism. His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama."
Butler's words might not have been the wisest, but even the unwise have a First Amendment right to freedom of speech in this country. And all Americans have the right and the responsibility to hold their government accountable for its actions--especially when lives, both young and old, are at stake.
But unless someone starts asking some serious questions--and demanding that our government leaders provide more real answers--we'll soon find ourselves propelled into a war with Iraq at a time when our resources could be better used elsewhere.
If this is truly a just war we are waging, our leaders--and the American people--had better wise up, because there's no room for error on the battlefield.
War talk begets war, and the U.S. needs to be prepared to defend our freedoms whenever they are in peril. So perhaps our leaders need to talk less and strategize more, because when we do enter into war--with Iraq or anyone else--it should be obvious to anyone and everyone why such action is necessary and just. As Teddy Roosevelt so rightly advised, we must "speak softly and carry a big stick."
And in the case of the current administration's recurring threats of war against Iraq, let us hope--for the sake of U.S. foreign policy and the high price of war--that it is not, as Shakespeare so eloquently put it, "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at staff@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.
Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission
John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.
