Iraqnaphobia (The War Against Terrorism - Post Afghanistan)

Member Name: Peakly

Product:	The War Against Terrorism - Post Afghanistan
Date:	25/03/03 (125 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: fhddfz, dfdfzbhdzfz, dfhdzfhdfz

Disadvantages: hdfhdfz, dfhdfzhdfz, dfdfz

I was going to organize a march this Friday, a demonstration against the war. We were going to leave our classrooms empty and march around the grassy verge adjacent to the building chanting slogans - “Not In My Name”, “Make Love Not War”, “No War For Oil” and “I’ll Be A Commie Until I Make Money”. At some point as I fell asleep last night – to the sound of haggard reporters and flying bombs – a vision of Sadam came to me (if it was really him…), his head attached to a spiders body and with the word ‘Iraqnaphobia’ scribed beneath. With a final yawn I dismissed the idea as being as crude as his oil.

Because our voice would be the equivalent to that of Charles Kennedy every Prime Minister’s question-time – sadly irrelevant, and widely ignored. Yes, we’d have felt better. Reading the newspaper or watching five minutes of television is enough to make young people today bit their lips and wish for an opportunity to shout, scream and bang. Increasing numbers have created that opportunity, and proud I am of all of them – only a few months ago, I’d frequently berate my generation as apathetic and moronic, now it brings a tear of pride to my eye, watching my peers across the country act upon their convictions. But their cries are indeed like that of our only political figure-head – politely acknowledged, then forgotten. Nothing now will stop war in Iraq, least of all me and my friends banging drums and dancing to Barry McGuire. All that is left is to sit sour-faced and wait for the inevitable disaster that will prove us right, hoping against hope that it will not arrive in news of death.

And that’s the catch, isn’t it? After weeks of vehemently opposing premature, unauthorized, unjustified and dubiously motivated military action in Iraq, they go ahead and ‘send in the boys’ anyway. So now there’s an
almost nation-wide case of emotional blackmail – if we’re so liberal and so caring about the suffering of others, we should be supporting our troops and praying they return safely, not waving banners and denouncing their acts of bravery. Well yeah, I pray they return safely. And not just because my career is dependant on it. Incidentally, I also pray the Iraqi civilians and soldiers remain safely. But our government can not expect support for this war. Our government does not deserve support for this war – even, I’d almost go so far to say, if it really did miraculously result in wide-spread middle-eastern democracy and peace. Because the decision taken was undemocratic in the first place. It was the wrong decision, even if, amazingly somehow, it was the right one, and our leaders have cheapened the system they wish to defend and impose.

I’m sure many of us share this fantasy – loud and clear and right in his face so he could understand: “Blair, little fella, without the agreement of the people you were elected and are paid to serve, without full agreement from the international community that at all costs you must work with, not against, you can not rage war, get it?!”. To me it has always been that simple. Because the ‘imminent threat’ we are expected to believe exists from Sadam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (which, astonishingly, have not made an appearance even as his power under-goes it’s greatest ever threat) are miniscule to the dangers of ignoring the will of the world. And scape-goating the French is as wreck less as it is transparent – injury, as it were, to massive, massive insult.

Yes, Sadam Hussein’s treatment of his people is abhorrent. Just as is the treatment of people in hundreds of places in this world, not least of all America and Britain. And yes, the humanitarian rhetoric of Blair and Bush holds some weight. But I ask you,
if the mission is to end human suffering and help the needy, surely to God we should be sending food to Africa rather then send bombs to Iraq. Surely the ridiculous expense of artillery and bombs would be better directed at providing health care, food and water for the millions that are starving, every day, while we muse over war eating biscuits from our arm-chairs. The fact Sadam happens to mistreat his people is a political convenience for Blair and Bush, because if they truly sought to end the worlds suffering, they’d be starting else where.

Violence perpetuates violence. Post-Sadam, all that will be left in the middle-east is anger and deep anti-western sentiment. A country will not emerge from decades of militant régime and conveniently fold into an American design. Even in the darkest corners of the desert, people are proud, and people do not want organized by a dogmatic force thousands of miles away. After the dust settles in Iraq, American involvement will become resented, and rebels perhaps more dangerous and more angry then Sadam will emerge. The divisions in the world will ultimately be widened, and, as one Guardian journalist remarked a few days ago, Osama Bin Laden and men of his inclination will be laughing. You can’t export democracy. You can not enforce peace. Time and time again this has and will be proven as a dangerous contradiction believed in ignorance.

Of course my personal irony, as with anyone else who now opposes war, is that I hope I am wrong. If you like, I hope this opinion deserves a big fat Not Useful. I hope Blair and Bush emerge as heroes, and I hope most of all that those poor Iraqis are taught how to live in a country as equal and as healthy as America. I’m sure it’s the Bush administrations fantasy to help an independent country to grow as prosperous and powerful and their own. In the mean-time, we can gasp at the television between mouthfuls and do all the praying that is as
ked of us. Look at it this way: it’ll make a great movie one day.

Summary: