|
|
|
Congress
Backs War Plans
BY
ROBERT JENSEN AND RAHUL MAHAJAN
After days of debate, Congress passed a pro-war resolution authorizing President Bush to used armed forces against Iraq “as he determines to be necessary and appropriate.” At the United Nations, Bush delivered an ultimatum—either endorse his war plans or risk “irrelevancy.” As War Times went to press, France and Russia, permanent members of the UN Security Council, had yet to cave in to Bush’s demands, despite efforts by the administration to buy them off with promises of a small share of postwar oil concessions. Anti-war
protests have grown with sit-ins, call-ins to congressional offices, and
massive protests in cities around the United States and the world. (See
box below). But Bush has shrugged them off and continues his beeline
to war. CIVILIAN CASUALTIES Bush claims that he has no quarrel with the Iraqi people, but they will suffer the greatest from a war. Despite talk about precision bombing and minimizing civilian casualties, U.S. strategy guarantees large-scale death and suffering. Routine high-altitude bombing to ìsoften upî an area before ground troops attack means routine targeting mistakes, reducing U.S. casualties at the expense of civilians. In Afghanistan, at least 3,000 civilians (as many as were killed in the Sept. 11 attacks) died during the bombing, with estimates of perhaps 20,000 more deaths from the disruption of agriculture and food distribution. Also expect the U.S. to deliberately target civilian infrastructureóelectrical generation, water and sewage treatmentóas it did during the 1991 Gulf War, according to government documents. That means not only immediate but long-term civilian casualties, as people without clean water or sanitation die from disease. If Iraqi troops dig in around Baghdad, a city of five million people, thousands could die if the U.S. unleashes a bombing campaign to dislodge the Iraqi soldiers. In Afghanistan, U.S. forces regularly bombed in crowded urban areas. There is no reason to think Iraq would be different. This will be a war of U.S. aggression, not a war to disarm Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction. UN inspectors who pulled out of Iraq in 1998 indicated that 95 percent of these weapons were destroyed. Bushís ìpreemption doctrineîóthe idea that the U.S. can arbitrarily and unilaterally attack anytime it claims a threatóundermines international law, establishes the rule of brute force, and provides a justification for U.S. attempts to control the Middle East, Central Asia and anywhere else the Bush administration sees fit. PROFITS OVER PEOPLE The cost is another reason to oppose a war. The U.S. governmentís own estimates range from $50-$200 billion, on top of the $100 billion increase in the military budget since 2000. Unlike in the Gulf War, there may be no allies to help with the tab. With the average amount spent on health care per person in the U.S. at roughly $5,000 per year, the cost of this war could provide a yearís health care for 10 million people. And who will fight these wars? Certainly not the sons and daughters of Bushís cronies. Those who do the fighting and dying will be the poor and people of color. An unprovoked attack on Iraq will almost certainly increase terrorism aimed at the U.S., as networks like Al Qaeda tap the anger and resentment of the Arab world against U.S. policies in the Middle East. The FBI and CIA admit that the war on Afghanistan increased the threat of terrorism. This war will be good for someóweapons manufacturers and arms dealers, construction companies that get contracts to rebuild a devastated society, and oil companies that win the rights to exploit Iraqi oil. It will serve the tiny elite at the heart of the U.S. empire by cementing their control of oil and oil profits. For the rest of the world, it will be a disaster.Ý Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin. Rahul Mahajan is the author of The New Crusade: America's War on Terrorism. Both are members of the Nowar Collective. (www.nowarcollective.com). |
|
|
War Times/Tiempo de Guerras is a fiscally sponsored project of the |
