The motives in Iraq
I'd like to respond to your (OGJ, Feb. 23, 2004, p. 17) editorial on the reasons why the US went to war in Iraq. You reason correctly that control of Iraqi oil clearly was not our motive; the costs of the war, translated into oil purchases, would buy us immeasurably more supply than total control of Iraq's oil would yield. However, I have severe reservations about the two motives you add to the mix—Iraqi dealings with terrorists and human rights. Al-Qaeda is basically a fundamentalist (Wahabi) Islamic gang virulently opposed to secular Arab governments, and the CIA itself had severe doubts about Iraqi cooperation with Al-Qaeda. Ironically, the country most damaging to our security—routing nuclear bomb secrets to North Korea and other basically terrorist states—is our ally Pakistan. As for human rights, use of this as a US motive to invade Iraq would be exceptionally hypocritical. We should remember that we were aiding the Iraqi military at the same time Saddam was devastating his non-Sunni population; as long as we viewed Iraq as a counterpoint to our enemy Iran, we turned a blind eye to Saddam's depradations. Further, Saddam was almost small fry when you compare him to a host of human rights violators around the globe, most of whom we choose to ignore (some are our allies or close trading partners). I sincerely hope that our adventure in Iraq turns out well for the Iraqi people and for the region—but let's not kid ourselves about our motives.
Steve Plotkin
Rockville, Md.
Politics, security, and oil
The editorial, "Politics, security, and oil" (OGJ, Mar. 1, 2004, p. 17) implied that the US would not be any more secure if we reduced our dependence on imported oil. You know, a guy from my hometown was shot down in the first Gulf War, so I cannot agree with your position. However, the editorial includes one statement that I can agree with: "Panic leads to calls for the suspension of market economics and individual freedoms."
Sure enough, this administration has suspended the basic economic principle of competition so that it can award no-bid contracts to its friends.
I have even found that the restriction of individual freedoms has reached me personally. I am refinancing my mortgage, and there among the paperwork was a new form mandated by the Patriot Act. It's called the Applicant Identification Verification form, and I assume that it will be forwarded to a national database somewhere. Is this really any of the government's business?
I think that the Bush administration has panicked in its response to 9/11, and it is trampling on the great founding principles of our country.
Dale Shultz
Iowa City, Iowa