Operation Iraqi Freedom
(02-07-2004)

Weeks ago when I saw the citizens of Baghdad rejoicing over a fallen statue of Saddam Hussein, I felt a surge of emotion and my eyes moistened. Now U.S. troops have captured the man himself, the "ace of spades" in this endeavor. I commend our soldiers for their courage, diligence, and sacrifice. The intended results of Operation Iraqi Freedom seem good right now for the majority of Iraqi citizens, and I am glad for them. However, before we rush into additional wars of liberation, we need to stop and consider this: Does the end justify the means?

1) Congress has the right and responsibility to declare war.

The Constitution of the United States gives the Congress all legislative power granted by that document, including the power to declare war. The U.S. Congress has only declared these seven wars in our history: the First Barbary War (1801-1805), the War of 1812 (1812-1814), the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), the Spanish-American War (1898), the Border War (1917-1921), the First World War (1917-1918), and the Second World War (1941-1945). The conflicts against North Korea, North Vietnam, Indians in the United States and its territories, the Confederate States of America, and many other nations and groups have not been declared wars.

A formal declaration of war is just for our enemies, for our soldiers, and for the American people. For our enemies, it states firmly our intentions and gives them the opportunity to surrender. For our soldiers, it assures them that our nation stands behind them in their work. For the American people, it explains who and why we are fighting. Congress authorized President Bush to use force against Iraq "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate," but it did not officially declare war.[1] This method of violence is politically safe for both parties. If the war goes well, both can claim credit for making it happen. If the war goes poorly, both can disclaim responsibility -- Congress can say the President did it, and the President can say Congress authorized it.

We're talking about the lives of real people and vast amounts of wealth and property in the balance. If we're going to go to war, we ought to start it and conduct it properly.

2) American foreign policy is a mess.

Did you know that Donald Rumsfeld (the current Secretary of Defense) met with Saddam Hussein in 1983 on a mission from President Reagan and that the United States supported Iraq in its war against Iran? I don't understand all the complexities of international relations, but maybe that's because international relations are too complex. Why does President Bush criticize the Communist regime in North Korea while befriending the Communist regime in China? Why are human rights issues more pressing in Iraq than in Sudan?

I still don't know exactly why we went to war in Iraq. Was Saddam Hussein a bad guy? Yes, but the world has lots of bad guys, including many bad leaders. Did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction? Maybe, but many countries have weapons of mass destruction, and the United States is the only nation that has used the major weapon of mass destruction -- the atomic bomb -- in war. Did Iraq help Osama Bin Laden or other terrorists? I don't know, but other countries have contribued to terrorist attitudes and actions. Why Iraq? Why now?

The Congressional authorization of force in this case said that the President could use U.S. troops to "enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq"[1]. Is that the main reason? America is not the world's policeman, and that is a dangerous, indeed impossible, job for any nation to take on. America needs to bring home her far-flung military empire and mind her own business well.

3) Women should not be in the military.

The story of Jessica Lynch made headlines, and Shoshana Johnson received a bit less attention. They suffered a terrible ordeal, but both made it out alive. We cannot say as much for Spc. Lori Piestewa. She was from the Hopi tribe in Arizona, a 23-year-old mother of two. She was a friend of Ms. Lynch and was caught in the same ambush. Lori Piestewa died in Iraq.

War is bad enough without putting women in the thick of it. Women are weaker. They can't bear the same strains that men can. Putting young men and women in close quarters causes problems. Having women in the military is demeaning to women and demoralizing to men. I can understand women fighting to defend themselves in a desperate last stand, but cowardly men are the ones who send women into danger while they sit securely in their positions of power. (For more on this issue, see the Vision Forum website.[2])

4) War is rarely the best option.

War revs up the military industrial complex, which means (borrowed) money flowing through the economy. War brings destruction, which allows the government to give contracts to companies for rebuilding what was destroyed. War generates patriotic emotions, which are good for incumbents and bad for dissenters. Am I being cynical?

According to the Department of Defense as of February 6, 529 American soldiers have died in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and 3003 have been wounded.[3] Several thousand Iraqi civilians have been reported killed[4], plus the Iraqi soldiers killed during the initial fighting. Now that Saddam is captured, how many more people have to die?

If the United States really had a compelling need to get Saddam Hussein out of power, then why didn't we send a team of special forces to capture him or kill him? Or instead of risking even those American lives, why didn't we offer a reward of $1 billion for Saddam, dead or alive? We could have saved an untold number of lives, American and Iraqi, and an untold amount of wealth and resources, American and Iraqi. Is assassination really worse than massive destruction? If moral qualms or international conventions frown upon such a move, then why is all-out war seen as better? I admit that these alternatives make me a bit squeamish, but major war is repulsive in this case.

God has obviously used war at times to accomplish his purposes. I believe that the careful, measured use of violence is morally acceptable in certain situations. However, waging war in this case seems to be overkill.

5) Making Changes in the World

Americanism will not save the world. Only Jesus can do that. If we export our political structure, our business know-how, and our cultural productions without exporting the teachings of Jesus Christ, then we will do a disservice to the people of the world. I understand that abortion was illegal in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Why is abortion legal in the United States under George W. Bush?

George W. Bush talks a good talk, and I think he is sincere in his expressions of faith. However, I do not trust him as a political leader. A man who does not follow the Constitution of his own country cannot do much to help others form a reliable government. I don't watch Jay Leno's Tonight Show, but this quote attributed to him makes a significant point: "As you may have heard, the U.S. is putting together a constitution for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? Think about it-it was written by very smart people, it's served us well for over two hundred years, and besides, we're not using it anymore."

This was one of the hardest essays to write that I have published in "John's News and Views." I don't usually get much feedback. I know you are busy and you probably get lots of e-mail. I keep writing because I am concerned for the future of our country. I want to remind you of the important issues and think through them with you. If my facts are wrong, or my interpretation of them, please let me know. I am seeking the truth and the right.

[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html
[2] http://www.visionforumministries.org/sections/hotcon/ht/womeninmilitary/
[3] http://www.pentagon.gov/news/
[4] http://www.iraqbodycount.net/