|
|
Voice |
|
|
|
Anyone going into a venture must consider what
can be gained, what can be lost and what are the risks. This applies to a business opportunity where you consider if
you will lose everything you own for a chance at immense success, and
what are the odds. In a
marriage, you weigh the chances of happiness against what could make you
unhappy. The same thing
applies to a war. Assuming America is on the fast lane to starting
a war with Iraq and nothing will stop it, you have to look at the best
and the worst. What can we
and the world gain, and what can we lose?
And is success, whatever that goal is, worth the risk? Iraqis are a poor people, despite the rich oil wells. They are steeped in the feudal system of the Arabic countries. Years ago when I was an AP Wirephoto for the Virginian Pilot I became friends with Bob Riffenburg who had the same job in Richmond with the Times Dispatch in 1950. His late father had been an instructor at VPI and Bob’s mother ran a boarding house for students at Blacksburg. One weekend I went with Bob to visit there. One of the student-roomers was from a Baghdad affluent family. He talked about a servant on his father’s estate. “I became angry at him one day over something
frivolous,” he recalled, “and I began to beat him.
Before I realized it, I could have killed him and had the right
to do so. No one would have
said anything. He was my
servant.” Likely most peasant Iraqis are still in this
situation. These are the
people who will be caught in the middle, between warring factions intent
on killing each other. But—let’s look at the best scenario.
Saddam Hussein becomes convinced George Bush will invade Iraq
with or without world opinion. He has seen the “mother of all bombs” explode in Florida.
He has seen the high tech
weapons advertised on TV which the military will test on his poorly
trained troops. He has seen
200,000 plus troops at his border, when Dwight Eisenhower only used
150,000 to invade Europe for D-Day. Saddam abdicates, moves to Cuba and shares
cigars with Castro, where they can throw rhetoric at the United States.
The people of Iraq throw roses at the conquering heroes the way
Allies were greeted in Europe during World War II.
Not a single life is lost. No
bombs are dropped and there are no hollowed and burned out buildings to
stand as monuments to war’s destruction.
Exxon leads a consortium of American oil companies to take over
the French and Russian work on oil fields.
They began pumping, after they’ve joined OPEC and agreed to
keep the price high, and give the Iraqis a percentage of the net profit
after creative bookkeeping has been used.
Iraq is proclaimed a Democracy with no factional jealousies
between religions. United Nations and NATO countries that dragged
their feet and tried to slow America down on its invasion admit they
were wrong. They come
aboard and proclaim war is peace, a use of words George Orwell would
have loved. Come to think
of it, he did say something about war and peace being synonymous. Terrorism, which is supposed to be what this war
is all about, no longer exists. Terrorists
around the world are impressed by the smart bombs and stealth bombers
and put down their suicide bombs. The
Arab world proclaims America the great peacemaker, through threat of
war, and the Middle East lives in harmony.
The Palestinians see that might makes right and accept any terms
for peace. North Korea and Iran see the perils of building
their own nuclear arsenal and sue for peace on any terms. No more saber rattling around the world.
No more cold war and hatred of American ways. Americans at home are happily surprised to find
the war, instead of putting the economy possibly trillions of dollars in
the red, has made a profit. Wal-Mart,
McDonalds and Office Depot are given franchises in Iraq and lead the
stock market in breaking new peaks of prosperity. That’s the best and would be possible in
Candide’s “best of all possible worlds.”
But don’t bet on it. Look at the worst that can happen.
The United Nations, which was the dream of freedom loving people
after World War II, is discarded as a forum for settling disputes
peacefully. NATO is
dissolved by countries who think they should be equal partners in
decision making on war, rather than dictated to.
Since the American military has announced it is not opposed to
making a preemptive strike and using nuclear weapons first, other
countries take on the same attitude.
Plans are made for launching nuclear missiles at American
targets. America has to
fight enemies around the world. Saddam fights back like the proverbial cornered
rat. He has nothing to
loose. Oil fields are
destroyed and flames and smoke are over the Middle East.
Since he has been sure no matter how much of his well quoted
“weapons of mass destruction” he destroys, he is sure America and
Britain will attack him any way. He
has kept some weapons back and uses them as a last stand.
Chemical, biological and nuclear attacks are unleashed.
American troops and Iraqi soldiers and civilians are killed and
maimed. Israel is the
target of Iraqi missiles and an onslaught of suicide bombers. Middle East countries around Iraq are bankrupted
by refugees, and America is hated for destabilizing the region.
Old enemies such as Russia, China, North Vietnam and North Korea
take advantage of the unpopularity of America to become world leaders.
Terrorist attacks on American soil escalates, with the undertow
hatred of what they consider arrogance and bullying power.
And the American economy is plunged into a depression as
taxpayers are loaded with war debts and consumer distrust. The real scenario would exist somewhere between
two extremes. But we must
consider all alternatives. Normally,
I’m an optimist and expect the best.
In this seemingly unstoppable attack on Iraq, I am very
pessimistic. The problems of a preemptive attack are great.
This is not the Gulf War where Iraq invaded Kuwait and the world
opposed Saddam. This is
America, Britain and Spain ignoring the rest of the world to depose a
government. Even the supposedly objective media have joined the chorus. People who support immediate attack on Iraq conduct “pro-American” rallies. Then those who are in opposition are dubbed “anti-American.” If war must come, so be it. But at least let us know we have exhausted every effort of peace, and are part of the world community—not alone. If a little patience will save one life, American or Arab, waiting is worth it.
|
