As the weeks progress and the threat of war looms closer, it seems the Bush administration will stop at nothing to see Saddam disarmed.
Over the past three months, I have done my best to keep track of what has been going on between the Middle East and United States. In the past three weeks, however, I have failed to make a decision on whether I support this impending war.
I believe there are many Americans who feel much the way I do - frustrated about the questions of 'when' and 'why' and overwhelmed by the daily news coverage that has bombarded our televisions, newspapers and magazines.
For those of us who know this to be true, news about the "Showdown with Iraq" has escalated to a mind-numbing affair where, even if you try to understand the facts, you wind up confused.
As I try to sludge through the coverage, my indecisiveness has not been helped by the war of words that has broken out here at home. Suddenly, everywhere you turn, it seems someone else has a differing opinion on whether or not we should cross the line in the sand.
For instance, take a look at any newspaper's opinion page. There will no doubt be readers who spout views similar to those of Stephen Fairweather of Shaker Heights, Ohio. In the Jan. 24 edition of USA Today, Fairweather wrote, "A closer look at the current world situation tells me that the worst place to start a war is in the Middle East. Tensions in the region are so complicated that I doubt our government officials even understand what the U.S. is getting into."
In Sunday's forum page of The Star Press, Muncie resident David Study agreed with Fairweather.
"Mr. President, this country and world do not want war," Study wrote. "You are acting like a bully on the playground with all the biggest and best toys."
And just when I find myself beginning to take sides with readers like Fairweather and Study, along comes the viewpoint of a reader like Ute Forlano of Colorado Springs. In the same issue of USA Today, Forlano's defensive stance contrasts sharply with the critical views of Fairweather.
"As a world superpower, the United States has an obligation to the rest of the world," Forlano wrote. "I wouldn't be surprised if the suppressed people of Iraq were wondering what's taking the U.S. so long to remove Saddam Hussein from power."
Am I the only one reading these letters and feeling disoriented as to whom I should be rooting for and what I should believe?
Somehow, I doubt it. But what are the reasons behind the indifference? Some may use the excuse of apathy, finding it easier to pass on news because they are tired of seeing the words "war" and "Iraq" in headlines. Others have too little education on the history of the conflict to make sense of its coverage now. And, for people like myself, many may just feel torn on the issue.
I find myself asking questions like "Is the U.S. playing the bad guy in wanting Saddam to disarm? Why step in now? Where is the evidence to back the urgency? And what will happen to the men and women who are giving up their families to fight overseas?"
As heavy as these questions may be, let us hope President Bush addresses some of them in his State of the Union address Tuesday. Because if he can't give his people a more pressing reason for war, then perhaps we shouldn't be contemplating it at all.
Write to Gail at glkoch@bsu.edu
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
