Addendum to Sanders Land, Clinton Castle:
Global Exchange's Top Ten Reasons Not To Go To War in iraq (2002)
The White House is set to launch a war against Iraq. Yet there has been no convincing explanation of why a war is needed, and the international community is strongly opposed to a US attack on Iraq. A war against Iraq would isolate the US from the rest of the world, undermine the effort against terrorism, and kill tens of thousands of civilians. This is a war that will tear the world apart.
1) There Is No Justification for Going to War
What was Iraq’s act of aggression against us that justifies
war? There has been no attack on the US, no Iraqi threat
of war, no Iraqi connection to September 11. War should
be a last recourse of self-defense, a step to be taken only
when all other alternatives have been exhausted. What the
Bush Administration is planning is an act of aggression,
not self-defense.
2) Iraq Does Not Pose a Clear and Present Danger
The White House says we should invade Iraq to
prevent Saddam Hussein from using weapons of mass
destruction. But during the 1990s United Nations weapons
inspectors dismantled all of Iraq’s major weapons factories
and destroyed nearly all of Iraq’s chemical and biological
weapons and long-range missiles. According to Ex-Marine
and former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, Iraq
presents “absolutely nothing” of a military threat. Since
deterrence is working, why should the US start a war that
would lead to massive human suffering?
3) When It Comes to Invading Iraq, the US Has Few Allies
The international community supports sending
weapons inspectors to Iraq to disarm Saddam Hussein’s
regime, but it does not support the White House’s goal of
“regime change.” An invasion of Iraq would isolate the
US and shatter the principles of international cooperation
that are key to US and global security.
4) An Attack on Iraq Would Make Us Less Safe
An isolated US is an unsafe country. Attacking Iraq
without provocation will ignite anti-American sentiment
around the world, disrupting efforts to weaken terrorist
networks. While the benefits of invading Iraq are murky,
the costs are all-too-clear.
5) A Costly Invasion Would Take Resources Away from
Much Needed Priorities at Home
It is estimated that any full-scale invasion of Iraq will
cost up to $200 billion. During the first Gulf War, allies
like Japan covered 80 percent of the cost. This won’t happen
again. Instead of spending $200 billion on an unnecessary
war, we should be investing in our nation’s overcrowded
schools and failing health care system.
6) Invading Iraq Would Be Difficult—and Without a
Clear Victory
An invasion of Iraq will not be as easy as kicking the
Taliban out of Kabul. And if the US does overthrow Hussein,
what next? An invasion without allies would leave the US
to enforce a peace in a country fractured by ethnic conflicts.
7) A War Would Kill Thousands of People
An assault on Baghdad would result in far moreAmerican casualties than the war in Afghanistan. And the toll on Iraqis would be terrible—an invasion of Iraq could lead to the deaths of 80,000 innocent civilians.
8) We Should Not Wage a War for Oil.
The Bush Administration says we must invade Iraq
because Saddam Hussein is abusing his own people and
pursuing weapons of mass destruction. Yet at the same
time the US supports the nuclear-armed dictator of
Pakistan. The double standard makes one wonder: What
is this war really about? The short answer is oil. We should
not attack people in a far-off country to take their resources.
9) Other Options Besides War Are Available
When North Korea announced that it was close to
constructing a nuclear weapon, the Bush Administration didn’t
threaten war—instead, it started cooperating with our allies
in Asia to defuse the situation. The North Korean experience
shows a way of dealing with weapons of mass destruction and
proves that negotiations are preferable to war.
10) Opposition to the War Is Growing
Americans know deep down that this war makes no
sense. We have to educate our fellow citizens about why
war with Iraq is wrong, and then hold our elected
representatives accountable to the will of the people.
Copyright © 2002 Global Exchange
Return to Sanders Land, Clinton Castle.
1) There Is No Justification for Going to War
What was Iraq’s act of aggression against us that justifies
war? There has been no attack on the US, no Iraqi threat
of war, no Iraqi connection to September 11. War should
be a last recourse of self-defense, a step to be taken only
when all other alternatives have been exhausted. What the
Bush Administration is planning is an act of aggression,
not self-defense.
2) Iraq Does Not Pose a Clear and Present Danger
The White House says we should invade Iraq to
prevent Saddam Hussein from using weapons of mass
destruction. But during the 1990s United Nations weapons
inspectors dismantled all of Iraq’s major weapons factories
and destroyed nearly all of Iraq’s chemical and biological
weapons and long-range missiles. According to Ex-Marine
and former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, Iraq
presents “absolutely nothing” of a military threat. Since
deterrence is working, why should the US start a war that
would lead to massive human suffering?
3) When It Comes to Invading Iraq, the US Has Few Allies
The international community supports sending
weapons inspectors to Iraq to disarm Saddam Hussein’s
regime, but it does not support the White House’s goal of
“regime change.” An invasion of Iraq would isolate the
US and shatter the principles of international cooperation
that are key to US and global security.
4) An Attack on Iraq Would Make Us Less Safe
An isolated US is an unsafe country. Attacking Iraq
without provocation will ignite anti-American sentiment
around the world, disrupting efforts to weaken terrorist
networks. While the benefits of invading Iraq are murky,
the costs are all-too-clear.
5) A Costly Invasion Would Take Resources Away from
Much Needed Priorities at Home
It is estimated that any full-scale invasion of Iraq will
cost up to $200 billion. During the first Gulf War, allies
like Japan covered 80 percent of the cost. This won’t happen
again. Instead of spending $200 billion on an unnecessary
war, we should be investing in our nation’s overcrowded
schools and failing health care system.
6) Invading Iraq Would Be Difficult—and Without a
Clear Victory
An invasion of Iraq will not be as easy as kicking the
Taliban out of Kabul. And if the US does overthrow Hussein,
what next? An invasion without allies would leave the US
to enforce a peace in a country fractured by ethnic conflicts.
7) A War Would Kill Thousands of People
An assault on Baghdad would result in far moreAmerican casualties than the war in Afghanistan. And the toll on Iraqis would be terrible—an invasion of Iraq could lead to the deaths of 80,000 innocent civilians.
8) We Should Not Wage a War for Oil.
The Bush Administration says we must invade Iraq
because Saddam Hussein is abusing his own people and
pursuing weapons of mass destruction. Yet at the same
time the US supports the nuclear-armed dictator of
Pakistan. The double standard makes one wonder: What
is this war really about? The short answer is oil. We should
not attack people in a far-off country to take their resources.
9) Other Options Besides War Are Available
When North Korea announced that it was close to
constructing a nuclear weapon, the Bush Administration didn’t
threaten war—instead, it started cooperating with our allies
in Asia to defuse the situation. The North Korean experience
shows a way of dealing with weapons of mass destruction and
proves that negotiations are preferable to war.
10) Opposition to the War Is Growing
Americans know deep down that this war makes no
sense. We have to educate our fellow citizens about why
war with Iraq is wrong, and then hold our elected
representatives accountable to the will of the people.
Copyright © 2002 Global Exchange
Return to Sanders Land, Clinton Castle.