AN ALTERNATIVE TO WAR!

I believe it is too late to halt bush's push to war. He has an agenda that will only be satisfied by invading and holding. Still, I added my voice to the ones on the link. We should all still keep trying.

I signed in too.

Same here.

War in Iraq
1. Remove Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party from power.

"the U.N. Security Council should establish an international tribunal to indict Saddam and his top officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Indicting Saddam would send a clear signal to the world that he has no future"

Why hasn't the United Nations, already indicted Saddam?

2. Enforce coercive disarmament.

"The existing U.S. military deployment should be restructured as a multinational force with a U.N. mandate to support and enforce inspections. The force would accompany inspectors to conduct extremely intrusive inspections, be authorized to enter any site, retaliate against any interference, and destroy any weapons of mass destruction that it found.

Wouldn't it be likely that any movement into Iraq by our troops, would be seen as an overt act of war, by Saddam?

3. Foster a democratic Iraq.

"An internationally directed post-Saddam administration could assist Iraqis in initiating a constitutional process leading to democratic elections."

Much preferable, that some puppet government set up by the United States. A very good idea.

4. Organize a massive humanitarian effort now for the people of Iraq.

"Humanitarian aid deliveries must be protected, if necessary, by a U.N. force under Security Council mandate."

Hasn't Saddam, repeatedly used these types of supplies, for his own use. Without, an overpowering force to enforce it, why would anyone believe that things would be different?

5. Recommit to a "Roadmap to Peace" in the Middle East.

"The road to peace in the Middle East leads not through Baghdad, but through Jerusalem."

Wrong! The road to peace in the Middle East leads through "education." As long as "hate" is taught to young minds, no matter what country they reside in, then there can be, no lasting peace. Our involvement in the Middle East, has to do with our dependence on their oil. If we can further develop renewable forms of energy (Ethanol), and rid ourselves from this dependence, then, we can then deal with the Middle East, in a more subjective light. As long as we need their oil, our actions will be directed to make sure that those pipe lines keep flowing in our direction.

I have dismissed the Palestinian issue. Until they can gather some control over their self destiny (Stop the Hate!), then they must endure, that which they help bring upon themselves. Israel is in a retaliatory mode. If and when The Palestinian people, embrace a peaceful solution, to their right for statehood, Then, and only then, will they have my full support. They must show to the world, That they have endured the hate and violence, and have risen above it.

6. Reinvigorate and sustain the "war against terrorism."

"it is in danger of being disrupted, both by acrimony and by lack of attention, as the world focuses on the impending conflict with Iraq."

Who says so? What proof of this exists. Pure idle speculation, to re-enforce a one sided opinion. The war in Iraq, is a military action. The war on terrorism, is a security action. INTERPOL, Scotland Yard, the CIA, etc. are directing this fight, world wide. The only acrimony and lack of attention, is foreign governments, unwilling to cooperate fully, because they fear for their comfort and status-quo. Bali, was shaken up to action, by their acrimony and lack of attention.

In all, most of the ideals set forth by this "An Alternative to War for Defeating Saddam Hussein" is a very practical, and a compassionate alternative to a "War in Iraq." Unfortunately, it is really not plausible. I can not support something that doesn't encompass a more comprehensible solution, to dealing with Saddam Hussein. There is no question that this sociopath, must be removed. How much more suffering, must the people of Iraq endure, before something is done? Why should we live in terror, frightened that our actions to ensure our safety, will be dealt with, by an onslaught of more terrorism.

Sorry, but I choose to not live my life, by placating hate, to ensure an unsettled "Peace."

Frank, I signed the petition and got this message:

Your message

Subject: An Alternative to War for Defeating Saddam Hussein

was not delivered to:

[email protected]

because:

Error delivering to Information/Labour; Database is corrupt -- Cannot allocate space

I will keep trying, obviously some of you were able to get through.

Ferrous, I sympathize with much of what you said. The relevance of the UN is in question. Unless it does more to show the world that outlaw states will be dealt with severely, there will be no respect for them or their mission.

You said:

The road to peace in the Middle East leads not through Baghdad, but through Jerusalem."

Wrong! The road to peace in the Middle East leads through "education." As long as "hate" is taught to young minds, no matter what country they reside in, then there can be, no lasting peace. Our involvement in the Middle East, has to do with our dependence on their oil. If we can further develop renewable forms of energy (Ethanol), and rid ourselves from this dependence, then, we can then deal with the Middle East, in a more subjective light. As long as we need their oil, our actions will be directed to make sure that those pipe lines keep flowing in our direction.

So true!

Where we might part ways is that I see the Bush administration as a monarchy in its arbitrary push to war, disregarding any opposition, including tens of thousands of us here in the US, not to mention the rest of the world.

I thank all of you who have responded thus far.

I know this is a polarizing issue not only here in America, but in the world in general.

I wish I had more confidence in the people leading our country -- but to be honest, I have almost none.

We'll see where this thing goes.

Well, but some of the parts of this program are not an alternative to war against Iraq, they require it for their implementation. For example, removal of Saddam from power (diplomatic attempts of Arab countries to persuade Saddam to resign and to leave Iraq failed), coercive disarmament (coercion implies some forceful pressure, and no pressure except war is possible toward Saddam's regime), fostering of democratic Iraq (it does not seem realistic with a dictator in the presidential palace). Even "Roadmap to peace" is impossible while Saddam is in office, since his regime directly supports suicide bombing.
Well, I agree with all the points of the proposed program, but I see no ways of their implementation without forceful removal of Saddam.

In theory - looks good.

In practice as ferrous implies it won't work.

Take the indictment for War Crimes for example. They are still trying to nail Milosovic after how many months ?...and isn't Saddam Hussain only one possible candidate for indictment ? How about past or present leaders of China ?

Politics is the art of the "possible", and war is waged by those who think they can "win". The "reality" of the Iraq situation is a negotiable function of particular observers both now and with future hindsight. What we have here is (a) a viable backlash situation for 9/11 (b) a relatively weak bully/criminal who has bitten the former hand that fed him (c) a minor player in "international terrorism" (d) a regime which is a proxy "enemy" of Israel but with few friends (e) a location with strategic and commercial potential worth controlling (e) a marginally elected US President who needs simple problems and simple solutions...

All these and more, lend an inevitability to the impetus of the ensuing military action. And what of "morality" ?...like in all wars a luxury for armchair philosophers such as ourselves to wring our hands about !

A House Divided


It would be an interesting scenario if at this time, Bush "stands down," and allows the UN to continue their inspections. Without the immediacy of the threat, would you imagine that Saddam would be so willing to reluctantly comply?
For over twelve years, this cat and mouse game has been going on. For the last four years, all that the UN has been able to do, is watch Saddam throw the inspectors, out of the country.

Bush is going to send the troops into Iraq. There is no question of that. What is the other alternative? Watch as an ineffective, irreverent United Nations, passes one resolution, after another.

My advise to Bush (I'm sure he's listening), is that he withdraw his troops, refuse to commit US troops to any action sponsored by the United Nations, withdraw our support for this present embodiment of "world nations", and withdraw into our own borders. Maybe a drastic change in this country, on the scope of what China did in the late forties to early seventies. Let us deal with our own internal problems, before we go dictating our own brand of divisive form of government, to others.

My guess, is that the next main war the United States fights, might be one trying to save this country, from it's self.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/house.htm

IT IS ALL SUCH A SHAME, ISN'T IT?
VIOLENCE OF SUCH A CRUDE AND
UGLY MANNER IN THE YEAR 2003.
WHAT HAVE WE MADE OF OURSELVES
DURING ALL THE CENTURIES THAT
WE'VE HAD TO WORK ON TRYING
TO IMPROVE, TO BECOME MORE
THAN A FRIGHTENED BEAST FAST
ATTACKING HIS ENEMY LEST HIS
ENEMY MIGHT GET HIM FIRST.
WE ARE NOT WHAT WE WERE MEANT
TO BE.
WE ARE WHAT WE WERE MEANT NOT
TO BE.
WE HAVE DONE A REALLY ROTTEN JOB
OF TRYING TO GROW UP AND LEARN
HOW TO BE PART OF A GROUP, JUST A
PERSON AMONG PERSONS, A TINY BIT
OF SOCIETY, HOW TO WORK AS PART
OF A GROUP. WE HAD THE CHANCE
BUT IT APPEARS WE BLEW IT.

BY THE WAY, IT IS NICE TO SEE YOU
AGAIN FRANKAPISA, IT SEEMS LIKE
A LONG TIME SINCE OUR PATHS HAVE
CROSSED.

Strangely enough it seems that the minds of humans are more like computers, in their logic, than they would like to admit, and they both have the same fatal flaw.
The computer requires a specific logical order, to be able to function properly, and this state is very simple; each command bit must be off, or on.
If this "position" is unclear, the computer will go into a non decision loop, and "crash"!
Humans have the same limitation, to be "comfortable", we all must sort through the data available to us, and come to a - "the only possible" - conclussion; "right" or "wrong". Otherwise we crash; cease to function rationally, go off the deep end; blow up; nervous breakdown.

While I agree with virtually everything written here (with the exception of the information on the website which combines numerous nonactions and numerous suggestions which have already failed, with complete wastes of time - their intentions are good), but there is no definitive "answer" to this problem; war is bad/wrong, no question; SH is bad/evil, no question; he does not, and will not respond to verbal orders, and threats, proven; the only way to solve the problem is violence, aha.................

"crash"!

Just thought it would be charmingly retrospective to revive this post. That, and I haven't heard anybody say what a tw*t Dubya is lately, and I'm going into withdrawals.

My solution to war is to put all the world leaders in a sealed room( to prevent any of the weapons + radioactive waste escaping) with their weapons of choice and let them slug it out. At the end of the day we will vote, and whosever corpse is dismembered in the most interesting way wins the war ( subject to audience votes by sms, of course, like the pop idol programs). If the olympics is meant to foster world peace and unity, think how much unity this even more enjoyable and exciting game will foster.

WOuld you like to vote? Just sms the leaders name to the number on the screen. Make sure you spell it properly.

I like the whole sci-fi deal. Have a war played by computers. "Bang, you're dead"....Then we all shake hands!