War? No
COMMENT
by Rick Reiff and Michael Lyster
WE’VE DECIDED TO SHARE OUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THE LOOMING WAR WITH IRAQ.
This is not the kind of topic we normally discuss in this space, as far afield as our expressions sometimes are. We know our main job is to focus on issues specific to Orange County and to business.
But war is a grave business, terrorism is an awful threat, and what America decides regarding each of these will have profound consequences for the nation, the world and the economy. Those consequences could have as much or more impact on Orange County business than a state budget, a city hall scandal or a housing boom.
So at the risk of self-indulgence, we will opine for a minute on why we think a war with Iraq at this point is wrong.
We believe it is a mistake strategically, morally and economically. It will make it harder, not easier, to combat terrorism. A war will further destabilize the Middle East and Persian Gulf, fuel resentment toward the U.S. and weaken our standing with long-time allies. It will make the world less, not more, safe.
Winning’s not the issue. Loss of life, even, is not the issue. We assume the best, that victory will be overwhelming and swift. But what then?
Saddam Hussein is not the issue. He is villainous and despotic. But we do not believe the Bush administration has made a convincing case so far that Hussein poses a serious threat to U.S. interests. He has been, and remains, contained. We do not see the need for war when less-drastic measures, including U.N. inspections, are working. Despite his belligerence, we continue to discover more about Hussein’s weapons. When did patience cease to be a virtue?
U.N. resolutions are not the issue. Iraq has violated them. So have other countries. Hussein’s actions have brought him sanctions and condemnation, at great cost to his people. War is an inappropriate and disproportionate response.
Terrorism is the issue, which is why we oppose a war. In its sometimes incredible attempts to link secular nationalist Hussein with religious revolutionary bin Laden, the Bush administration has become a caricature. A war on Iraq is at best a costly diversion from the war on terrorism, at worst a miscalculation that will make it even harder to combat terror in the years ahead.
Some world resentment toward America is easily dismissed, part of the love-and-hate that comes with being the greatest power. But “The Last Best Hope of Man” is increasingly seen as a dangerous bully. Worse, the pursuit of “regime change” and “nation building” easily can mutate into costly occupation.
In such a world, we fear more radicalism, more terror, less freedom and, almost as an afterthought, less global trade, swords replacing ploughshares, a weaker economy.
We know our view about a war is counter to the majority of Americans who support the president’s policy. We know it puts us at odds with many conservative supporters of Bush who generally share our views on private enterprise and fiscal matters. We know it aligns us with Bush critics with whom we usually differ. But that’s how we see it.
War is likely to produce a quick victory at a terrible price.
,Rick Reiff, Michael Lyster
War, Addendum
I RAN ACROSS SOME LINES BY G.K. CHESTERTON, THE GREAT ENGLISH writer from the turn of the last century, that I think are pertinent.
Chesterton in 1905 contended that America, rather than being the rising world power of conventional wisdom, was actually a nation in decline. History proved him wildly wrong. However, Chesterton’s insights into war were keen, and perhaps more applicable to America today than then. Substitute the word “Iraq” for “Spain” in the following passage:
It may be said with rough accuracy that there are three stages in the life of a strong people. First, it is a small power, and it fights small powers. Then, it is a great power, and fights great powers. Then it is a great power, and fights small powers, but pretends that they are great powers, in order to rekindle the ashes of its ancient emotion and vanity. England exhibited this symptom of decadence very badly in the war with the Transvaal; but America exhibited it worse in the war with Spain. There was exhibited more sharply and absurdly than anywhere else the ironic contrast between the very careless choice of a strong line and the very careful choice of a weak enemy. America added to all her other late Roman or Byzantine elements the element of the Caracallan triumph, the triumph over nobody.
, Rick Reiff
