Wednesday April 2, 2003   |   wildcat.arizona.edu   |   online since 1994
Campus News
Sports
     ·Basketball
Opinions
LiveCulture
GoWild
Police Beat
Datebook
Comics
Crossword
Online Crossword
WildChat
Classifieds

THE WILDCAT
Write a letter to the Editor

Contact the Daily Wildcat staff

Search the Wildcat archives

Browse the Wildcat archives

Employment at the Wildcat

Advertise in the Wildcat

Print Edition Delivery and Subscription Info

Send feedback to the web designers


UA STUDENT MEDIA
Arizona Student Media info

UATV - student TV

KAMP - student radio

Daily Wildcat staff alumni


Section Header
Iraqi regime provides many examples of ruthlessness

Photo
Steve Campbell
By Steve Campbell
Arizona Daily Wildcat
Wednesday April 2, 2003

An overwhelming majority of Americans now support the current war in Iraq. Though some will never be in favor of removing Saddam Hussein by force, the polls clearly show that many remain open-minded to the fact that, if provided adequate evidence, this war, to them, would be justified.

But what happens if that evidence never comes? What happens if the Iraqi regime is overthrown and, after an exhaustive search, no weapons of mass destruction are found? Does the war now become unjustified? Though most believe it is only a matter of time until the Iraqi regime employs chemical weapons, for the sake of argument, we'll say none are ever used or found.

Many would say that the United States pushed for a regime change on the premise that Saddam Hussein refused to disarm and therefore, since there were no weapons to disarm, the war should never have been fought.

Others would say that violations to UN Resolutions 678, 687 and 1441 provided adequate justification to resume the Gulf War that started in 1991.

The bottom line is that none of that should matter. Saddam Hussein and the thugs that he surrounds himself with are some of the most ruthless and evil people to ever set foot on the face of this earth and should be removed from power regardless of whether or not they possess weapons of mass destruction.

On the day he took power in Iraq, Saddam showed his ruthlessness. He brought all the members of the

government together, as well as many military leaders, and began reading off names. Those whose names were called would be immediately taken outside and shot. Saddam made it clear that nobody would threaten his authority.

During the last Gulf War, an Iraqi general disagreed with Saddam on his military tactics, following which Saddam took out his sidearm and shot him in the head.

Nobody was exempt from the wrath of Saddam. The brother of Iraqi foreign Minister Tariq Aziz was thrown in prison and eventually killed. Even his own sons-in-law were murdered upon returning to Iraq after earlier fleeing the country.

After an uprising in the north, Saddam gassed his own people, killing thousands. And in order to control the people in the south, Saddam decided to drain the marshes, creating a desolate land and killing thousands more.

The victims were not enemies from foreign countries that he invaded. Nope. These were his own people. These were the people that he was supposed to govern and protect, not murder.

Now that they are at war, the Iraqi regime has intensified the barbaric acts against its own people.

One man who waved a white flag was tied up and bled to death after his tongue was cut out. A woman who waved to coalition forces was hanged in public for everybody to see. Men are being told that if they don't fight for Saddam, then their wives and children would be killed. If the people of Iraq didn't want to be liberated, would these tactics really be necessary?

Even against the enemy, the barbaric acts of the regime are evident. Fake surrenders and suicide bombers are the tactics now being used by Saddam's special forces. And while Iraqi prisoners of war are treated humanely, well fed, and even operated on by U.S. military surgeons, the same cannot be said for U.S. POWs. They are interrogated, tortured, and then executed with a bullet to the head.

Please don't use the argument that this man should not be removed from power. The absence of weapons of mass destruction does not make this regime any less dangerous. The Iraqi people want to be liberated bur clearly cannot do so on their own for fear of reprisals from Iraqi troops.

So who are we to decide that it's our responsibility to save this country and its people?

The answer is simple. We are the United States of America. We are the world's only superpower. We are the ones who liberated Kuwait in 1991. We are the ones who liberated Panama a few years earlier. We are the ones who liberated Germany and France during WWII. We did not do so as an imperialist nation. As Secretary of State Colin Powell said, the only land we asked for in return was enough land to bury our soldiers who fought to liberate their country.

We are defenders of freedom. If we cannot stand up to ruthless dictators and protect those who cannot protect themselves, then we do not deserve to carry that title.


Something to say? Discuss this on WildChat
spacer
spacer
spacer
divider
divider
divider
divider
divider
UA NEWS | SPORTS | FEATURES | OPINIONS | COMICS
CLASSIFIEDS | ARCHIVES | CONTACT US | SEARCH


Webmaster - webmaster@wildcat.arizona.edu
© Copyright 2002 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media