Iraq
position paper
Joe media quotes on Iraq:
“What if we let the weapons
inspectors into Montana?” --Joe, ABC News, Toledo,
Ohio.
“I
wouldn’t have gone to war in Iraq,”
[said Schriner]. –Xenia
(OH) Daily Gazette
“A
terrorist group looks as good to a (poverty stricken) kid in Baghdad,
as a gang does to a (poverty stricken) kid in Chicago,”
Schriner said. –Cortez (CO) Journal
…he
[Schriner] said he would have handled the situation (in Iraq)
differently by lifting sanctions to allow the Iraqis necessary food and
medication. – The Post, Athens,
Ohio.
Schriner
said he believed changes could have been made in Iraq through non-violent
means, just as Martin Luther King Jr. did in the south and Ghandi
did in India. –Valley Courier, Alamosa,
Colorado
***
categories covered in the position paper
below: 1) the issues; 2) the plan; 3) justified “collateral damage” (civilian
deaths)?; 4) destabilizing and changing international alliances; 5) what about our
weapons of mass destruction?; 6) no to
depleted uranium munitions; 7) Iraqi refugee dilemma; 8) on the ground in
Baghdad; 9) new guidelines for torture?; 10) costs to the world; 11) costs to
the U.S.
1) the
issues:
When
looking at the Iraq
War through the lens of “Just War” principles (which would be our
administration’s yard stick for going to war), it doesn’t match up.
For
instance, Just War Principles stipulate:
“The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the
evil to be eliminated.”
In light of
this, there is a good case to be made that the bad is far outweighing the
potential good in Iraq
at this point.
Estimates
on civilian deaths in Iraq
vary, but it has been tremendously significant.
The UN estimates that just in the year 2006 alone, there were some
34,000 Iraqi civilian deaths. (Our
administration would also count as civilian “war deaths” the almost one million
people who died during U.S. backed, and UN imposed, sweeping sanctions in Iraq
between 1991 and 2003.)
The Iraq
War has also united insurgency groups throughout the Middle East
to fight a “Holy War” (jihad) against the United
States.
And as the resistance is becoming more successful in Iraq,
it is galvanizing more and more support throughout the Arab World – and stoking
more anti-U.S. sentiment.
Also, we
launched a war predicated on finding weapons of mass destruction that weren’t
there. And the tragic irony, I told the Cortez
(CO) Journal, is: “We have 10,000 weapons of mass destruction
(nuclear missiles) aimed all over the world!”
During a
talk at St. Leo’s College in St. Leo, Florida,
I said outside of here we have to look like one of the biggest terrorist
nations on the planet, with our nuclear arsenal. Added to this, American military is using
depleted-uranium tipped bullets and bombs that are leaving Iraq
literally radioactive and exponentially spiking the incidence of cancer, birth
defects, and other disorders.
Our action
has also destabilized Iraq,
opening the door to sectarian Civil War between the Shiites and Sunnis. Given that these two peoples have considered
each other “religious apostates” for centuries, our administration would have
been a lot more considered about waging war in Iraq,
with the possibility of destabilizing the country.
The
humanitarian crisis is compounded as 60,000 to 90,000 Iraq
refugees are now fleeing Iraq
– every month.
Also, Just
War Principles would prohibit going to war to, among other things, “obtain
wealth.” And there are all kinds of
indicators that part of our rationale for going into Iraq
is to have a hand in controlling the oil supply, the second largest in the
world.
The Iraq
War ‘cost to the world’ has been great as well.
It has diverted attention and resources away from such international
crisis as the genocide in Sudan. It has diverted tremendous amounts of money
that could have been used to cut world hunger, fight disease, help reverse global warming… (America
is now spending $2 billion a week on the war.)
And on the
home front, the Iraq War has meant U.S.
military deaths and maiming, significant cuts in social programs, emotionally
disturbed and fractured military families – as the next wave of post traumatic
stress disorder plays itself out.
Granted,
hindsight is 20/20.
And this is
not an indictment of the Bush Administration.
What it is is an assessment of what’s gone wrong. And the following is a plan for how to, not
only fix it, but to forge a future of strengthened international alliances,
with the potential for much more world peace.
It is also a chance for us: to learn from history.
2) the
plan:
We have
traveled the country extensively listening to experts’, and average citizens’,
takes on the Iraq War. Based on some of
what we’ve heard, we’ve crafted the following plan.
And at the
outset, it is important to say that what we currently see as a tremendous
negative -- could be used to create world peace on a grand scale.
As
president, I would initially go to Iraq
and offer a formal apology to the Iraqi people for the civilian deaths that are
so often cavalierly referred to as “inevitable collateral damage.” These are Moms, Dads, kids…
I would
then set up an Iraq War Victim’s Family Fund (like the Fund for the families of
the Sept. 11th victims). The
Fund would not only be intended for the families of war victims, but the
families of victims who died during the stringent sanctions on Iraq
prior to the war.
I would
also formally apologize for starting a preemptive war predicated on finding
weapons of mass destruction. Not only
weren’t they there, but I would admit there is, indeed, a tremendous duality
between telling other nations they can’t have weapons of mass destruction – but
we have 10,000 of them (nuclear missiles) aimed all at targets all over the
world.
As a way of
tangible amends, I propose not only nixing proposed uranium upgrades (at
billions of dollars) of our current nuclear missiles, but I would propose
unilateral disarmament of our existing nuclear weapons. And with all these savings, I’d fund (among
other things) the rebuilding of Iraq’s
infrastructure.
And I would propose
the rebuilding contracts go primarily to Iraqi firms, not American firms.
I would
suspend the use of uranium-depleted munitions, for good. And I would suspend torture of any
terrorist/insurgent suspects, in Iraq
or out.
I would
call for a general populace vote in Iraq
to see if a majority wanted us there at all.
Either way,
I would institute a U.S.
troop, incremental step down and ask for replacements with U.N.
Peacekeepers. At the same time, I would
incrementally start to dismantle the more than 100 bases we’ve established in Iraq.
Our
administration’s paradigm would not be to have presence there so we could
protect “America’s
interests,” (read: oil).
To help
individual Iraqis recover, I would suggest the Iraqi populace get individual,
yearly oil revenue dividends (like every Alaskan currently gets). And I would propose America
matches these dividends for the next five years.
I would
propose this money come from a Federal tax on gasoline in America. (Most Americans, in a de facto way, are
partially responsible for the Iraq War because of our dependence on foreign
oil. This, in turn, drives policy
decisions like going into Iraq.)
Our
administration would work stridently to move America
away from dependence on foreign, and domestic, oil (and all that brings,
pollution, global warming, urban sprawl…).
And we would exhort people to sacrifice when it comes to energy use and
switch to alternative forms of energy, whether wind, solar geothermal. (See our Energy Policy position paper.)
I would
also set up a division within the State Department specifically for Iraq
refugees – there are currently 1.8 million Iraqis who have fled the
country. And I would relax criteria for
them if they wanted to resettle in the United
States.
I would also suggest much more funding for those who want to eventually
resettle back in Iraq,
from any part of the world.
In
addition, I would request additional funding for such non-governmental agencies
as The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants to help Iraqi refugees as
well.
In the
aftermath of the Iraq War, to help quell some of the residual sectarian strife,
I would urge (and seeking funding for) such initiatives as Truth and
Reconciliation that worked so well in the relatively bloodless aftermath of the
transition from Apartheid in South Africa.
And in tandem, I would look to
instituting a version of the Ulster Project, which has been successful in
reversing some of the prejudice and hate for future generations of Northern
Ireland youth. I believe a similar initiative would work
with Sunni and Shiite youth.
Through the U.S. Department of
Peace that we propose, I would also recommend setting up a
Iraq/U.S. Sister Cities project to mobilize even more help into that country
and start to establish better international relations. (American cities with the same size and
demographics could pair with similar Iraqi cities and towns to establish a
conduit of funds, cultural exchange, trips…)
And it is my belief,
that as the rest of the Middle East saw our
earnest efforts at apology, amends and peace building, some of the tension and
anti-U.S. sentiment would ease. (And as
a domino effect, some of the terrorism threats might diminish as well.)
What’s more, the world would come
closer together.
The following is a much more in-depth
look at each component of the issues and each component of the plan:
3) justified
“collateral damage” (civilian deaths)?
As
president, I would start with a formal apology to the Iraqi people, and Arabs
throughout the Middle East, for killing scores of
innocent civilians in Iraq. Then I would set up a U.S. Iraq War Victim
Family Fund to financially help survivors (just like there was a fund for
family members of victims of September 11th).
I told The
Athens (OH) Post that I was strongly opposed to the Bush Administration’s
willingness to so cavalierly (it seems to me) tolerate so many civilian deaths
(and there have been a lot) as “inevitable collateral damage.”
Our
administration would subscribe to the Augustinian “Just War Doctrine.”
One of the
provisions in the Just War Principles is:
“The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the
evil to be eliminated.”
In other
words, it’s possible for nations to use excessive, destructive force when
stopping an aggressor, resulting in more casualties than would have
occurred if the aggression had been allowed to run its course.
Figures
vary on the civilian injury and death tolls in Iraq. But they have been extensive.
As of
January 2007, the Iraq Body Count Project estimates there have been between
53,040 to 58,543 civilian deaths due to insurgent military action and increased
criminal violence.
The Lancet
Study out of England
estimates that as of July 2006, there has been a staggering 655,000 Iraqi
deaths because of war, increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poorer
health…
And it is our contention, the Iraq
War started long before the 2003 invasion.
It started with the U.S.
urged, and U.N. backed, Iraq
sanctions put into effect after the first Gulf War in 1991.
According to the online
encyclopedia Wikipedia, these were perhaps the
toughest, most comprehensive sanctions in history. The sanctions included medical supplies, food
and other items of humanitarian necessity.
President George H. W. Bush
stated: “By making life uncomfortable
for the Iraqi people, (sanctions) would eventually encourage them to remove
President Saddam Hussein from power.” –Seattle-Post
Intelligencer (Aug. 7, 2003).
This never happened.
What’s more, estimates indicate
some one million Iraqis died because of the sanctions, and UNICEF put the
number of child deaths at 500,000 between 1991 and the U.S.
led invasion of Iraq
in 2003.
President
George W. Bush consulted with Pope John Paul II prior to the preemptive strike
into Iraq. The media reported the Pope strongly urged
President Bush not to attack Iraq. According to the Pope, the proposed action
didn’t line up with Just War criteria.
Shortly
after Bush’s meeting with the Pope, and prior to the start of the Iraq
invasion, I took to the streets as part of a peace march
protest in Findlay, Ohio.
I told the Findlay
Courier newspaper that I was marching in solidarity with the Pope on this
issue because I believed our proposed action would put too many innocent people
in harm’s way and the action would, most likely,
significantly destabilize Iraq
– and perhaps the rest of the Middle East region.
4) destabilizing
and changing international alliances
Under Just
War criteria, when weighing a military action, you also have to weigh whether
it will destabilize neighboring countries or change international alliances in
harmful ways.
Both have
happened, in part, with the Iraq War.
For
instance, insurgents throughout the Middle East are now
forming alliances and fighting with the resistance movements in Iraq. Iran
and Syria,
according to a multitude of consistent reports, are aiding these insurgents
financially and providing safe border conduits into Iraq.
As the
resistance becomes more successful, it is galvanizing more and more support
throughout the Arab World. Some of this
support is further fueled by long- standing, anti-U.S. sentiment because of our
military presence in Saudi Arabia, our extensive military backing of Israel,
and our ‘westernized’ intrusion through media and increased commerce on the
traditional values and customs of many of these Middle Eastern countries… (See our position paper on Terrorism.)
Our
administration would have also seriously factored in whether destabilizing Iraq
might open the door to the sectarian violence we are graphically seeing today.
In Colorado
Springs, Colorado, I
interviewed Gene Schwarz who teaches a course titled: “Islam and the Situation
in the Arab World.” He said it was common knowledge that the Sunnis and the
Shiites looked at each other as religious apostates. And to destabilize Iraq
could, indeed, lead to civil war.
In December
of 2006, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said the United
States is now losing a “civil war” in Iraq,
according to a Washington Post article.
In a National
Public Radio interview, Senator John Kerry said Sunnis (who are in the
minority) should be equally favored for oil revenues and political power. President Bush is also recommending all in
the Iraqi populace get a percentage of oil revenue.
As president, I would push for this
as well. And propose several other
things.
I would
propose that, for a period of five years, every year the U.S.
match these oil revenues as another away of amends for destabilizing and
destroying so much of their country, including placing undue economic burden on
almost all Iraqi citizens.
I believe
more egalitarianism between the Sunnis and Shiites, the show of good faith on America’s
part with more economic help across the board, and a step down of U.S.
troops, would all work to deescalate some of the tension.
Once the
war has wound down, I would push for “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”
(TRC) hearings throughout Iraq
to deal with the aftermath. Cleveland,
Ohio’s, Ed Horner told me this initiative was quite effective in stemming
violence after Apartheid ended in Africa.
According
to the encyclopedia Wikipedia, the TRC were
court-like bodies assembled after Apartheid.
Both victims and perpetrators could come forward to give testimony and
request amnesty.
The
commission was empowered to grant amnesty to those who committed abuses during
the Apartheid era, as long as the crimes were politically motivated,
proportionate, and there was full disclosure by the person seeking amnesty.
The
commission brought forth many witnesses who gave testimony about secret and
immoral acts committed by the Apartheid Government, the liberation forces
including the African National Congress and other forces for violence,
according to the online encyclopedia.
Horner said
many people experienced tremendous catharsis during the hearings and churches
from around the world had come to help counsel people in the ways of
“forgiveness.”
This was
generally reported as a success.
For more long-term peace in the
region, I would propose initiatives like the grassroots “Ulster Project.” On a campaign swing through Northwest
Ohio, I met with a host family who were involved with the “Ulster
Project.” They explained that the
tension and hatred in Northern Ireland
has been brewing for centuries.
To help
break the cycle in future generations, Ulster Project host families take in a
Catholic youth and a Protestant youth from Ireland
and they live together for a year in an attempt to break down barriers and
prejudices. It works, said the couple.
As
president, I would propose a similar, say, “Baghdad Project” where host
families took in a Sunni youth and Shiite youth to live together for a
year. This is a tangible way to try to
break trans-generational hate.
And this
could work with host families being both United
States families and Iraqi families.
(For more
on these and other strategies to promote worldwide peace, see our position
paper on the U.S. Department of Peace.)
5) What about our
weapons of mass destruction?
There would
also be a formal apology to Iraq
for starting a pre-emptive war predicated on finding “weapons of mass
destruction.”
Not only
weren’t there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but an even more salient
point, I told the Circleville (OH) Herald, is: We have 10,000 weapons of
mass destruction aimed all over the world!
“What if we
let the weapons inspectors in Montana,”
I posed to an ABC News reporter from Toledo.
This is
such a striking duality.
That is, we
are telling these, what we term “rogue” nations, that they can’t have weapons
of mass destruction – while our nuclear arsenal is massive. (And the Bush administration has recently
proposed spending billions to upgrade our nuclear missiles.)
Given all
this, I said during a talk in Oberlin, Ohio,
that outside of the U.S.,
“we must look like the biggest terrorist nation in the world at present.”
During a
brief debate with former Secretary of State James Baker on a National Public
Radio show (call in segment), I said common sense would indicate countries
around the world would be racing to develop their own nuclear weaponry as
protection against our threat.
As a show
of good faith to Iraq,
and the world in general, our administration would not only nix plans to
upgrade our nuclear missiles; we would also propose a program for incremental,
and unilateral, nuclear disarmament.
Omaha,
Nebraska’s Fr. Tom McCaslin
is a big proponent of this.
During a
campaign stop in Omaha, Fr. McCaslin, who is the former Social Action Coordinator for
the Omaha Diocese, said to me that we’ve funneled billions and billions of
dollars in nuclear weaponry – while thousands of little children starve to
death in the Third World, every day.
During an
interview on WHTV Radio in Steubenville, Ohio, I said I wondered if God
would consider a country that pumped billions of dollars into nuclear weapons
to feel safe, while little children starved to death, as part of the: ‘axis of
evil’?
And during
a talk to a youth group in Lake City, Florida,
I said our administration would be tremendously focused on making “war” on
things like World Hunger.
6) no
to depleted uranium munitions
Another
duality (tragic irony) is that in looking for weapons of mass destruction, we
are using limited weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
That is, we
are using depleted uranium tipped armor piercing bullets and bombs.
According
to a Toledo Blade article just after the start of the Iraq War, Science
Editor Michael Woods wrote that depleted uranium is radioactive and formed as a
byproduct in production of fuel for commercial nuclear power reactors and
nuclear weapons material.
At the time
of the article, Iraq
was expressing concern about long-term civilian health in that country because
of the use of depleted uranium.
And they
were expressing it with good reason, according to Ohio Northern University
Professor Ray Person. He is on the
advisory board for the relatively new Global Association for Banning Depleted
Uranium Weapons (GABDUW).
At a talk I
attended on the subject, Professor Person said that during the 1991 Persian
Gulf War, U.S.
munitions released more radiation than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, leaving a silent
trail of horror.
Professor
Person explained that when one of these uranium-depleted bullets pierces a
tank, or a bomb penetrates a steel bunker, at the point of impact, 70 percent
of the projectile’s radiation is released into the atmosphere.
Professor
Person said some 300 tons of uranium were dispersed throughout Iraq,
the first time.
He
continued that besides the radiation now in the water and soil in Iraq
from the depleted uranium, there are still highly radioactive bullets, shells
and abandoned tanks lying about the region.
The uranium’s half-life: 4.5 billion years.
Professor
Person said this has led to a tremendous increase in cancer in Iraq. He said statistics show that in the small
town of Basra, Iraq,
for instance, the cancer death rate has increased “17 fold,” from 34 deaths in
1988 to 538 in the year 2000. And this
increase seems to be playing itself out across the region.
As with the
aftermath of the atomic bombing in Japan,
babies are being born in Iraq
with multiple birth defects and many young children are developing leukemia,
said Professor Person. (And because of
the sanctions, many of these children have had little, or no, medical aid.)
Again, this
data deals with the aftermath of the first Gulf War, which was relatively
short. The current Iraq War has been
quite lengthy with regular use of depleted uranium munitions usage again.
The
long-term effects to the health of the Iraqi people could be catastrophic,
given the data from the first studies.
(And there have also been articles written about the potentially
negative effects of U.S.
military handling the depleted uranium munitions as well.)
Our
administration would immediately get behind the drive to ban depleted uranium
munitions.
We would
also urge providing as much long-term medical funds and medical personnel help
to a populace that could be plagued for generations with the effects of this
radiation contamination.
In the Toledo
Blade article referenced earlier in this section, Col. James Naughton, director of munitions for the Army Material
Command responded to a question about the depleted uranium:
“The Iraqis
tell us terrible things happened to our people because you used it last time,”
Col. Naughton said.
“Why do they want it (depleted uranium munitions) to
go away? They want it to go away
because we kicked the crap out of them – OK?”
Our
administration would take a tremendously dim view of such a response.
Also
according to the Just War criteria:
“Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole
cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man… A danger of modern warfare is that it
provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons –
especially biological, chemical or atomic weapons.”
Given the
‘atomic’ nature of depleted uranium munitions, and the potential long- term
effect in the cities of Iraq,
the use of these munitions would in no way line up with Just War criteria.
Note: In Canfield, Ohio,
I interviewed Terry Martin who is involved with the “Children of Chernobyl”
project. He and his wife have been a
host family for four years. Each summer
they have taken in Alexei Bogdonik. His family lives 20 miles from the Chernobyl
Nuclear Power Plant – the area is still quite radioactive. The boy’s mother died of cancer and each year
when he gets here, Martin said the boy is “ashen white.” However, after eight weeks here, Martin said
the boy is “full of color,” his immune system having time to heal.
As
president, I would propose a similar “Children of Iraq” program for children
who are living in the aftermath of this depleted-uranium, radioactive war zone.
7) Iraqi refugee dilemma
Another
exponentially growing humanitarian issue is the exodus of Iraqi refugees.
There are
an estimated 60,000 to 90,000 fleeing Iraq
each month. Until recently, the Bush
Administration had planned to resettle only 500 Iraqi refugees in the U.S.
this year (2007), according to a New York Times article.
The Times
also noted: “Some critics say the Bush
Administration has been reluctant to create a significant refugee program
because to do so would be tantamount to conceding failure in Iraq.”
Our
administration would push to welcome many more Iraqis.
And we
would stand in solidarity.
The day the
invasion started in Iraq,
I told the Lima (OH) News that I was opposed to the war because of the
humanitarian domino effect that could ensue.
Later in
the day, during an open-microphone community service at First Mennonite church
in Bluffton, Ohio, I said that now that the bombs were falling, refugees would
start fleeing, some initially into refugee camps, and the like.
I continued
that the problem for the average American is that we will watch this whole war
process rather antiseptically on television in the comfort of our own
temperature controlled homes. So
consequently, there isn’t much inertia to protest or to help.
I said that
maybe what we should be doing for Iraq
(Afghanistan, Palestine…)
is putting up tents in our own yards – and living in solidarity.
That night
our family put up a tent at the Bluffton
College campus with students and
town citizens who were standing in solidarity (and trying to raise funds for
homes) with some 13 million refugees around the world.
As
president there would be a tent on the White House lawn. And my family and I would be, at times,
sleeping in it.
Note: A bulk of Iraqi refugees will naturally
remain in the Middle East. As president, I would propose a division
within the State Department to help them with the transition to another
country, or to help them eventually resettle in Iraq. As stated above, I would also propose
relaxing immigration rules for those Iraqis wanting to settle in the U.S.
8) on
the ground in Baghdad
Duluth,
Minnesota’s Michelle Noar-Obed
said she, too, is concerned about the use of depleted uranium munitions in Iraq,
as she is concerned about a good number of issues in Iraq.
She has
been to Iraq four
times as part of Christian Peacemaker Teams.
Her last trip was in 2006. She
went to the streets of Baghdad.
Ms. Noar-Obed said the infrastructure was heavily damaged, the
terror and general tension was off the charts and the majority of the sentiment
toward the American government, and the American people, had devolved to
“hate.”
She said
the majority of Iraqis now see the U.S.
as “occupiers” with alternative motives.
And the U.S.
presence has sparked increasing resistance backlash and civil war – putting the
whole populace in jeopardy.
Ms. Noar-Obed said she believes (as do many) that part of our
motivation, if not a lot of our motivation, is that the U.S.
wants to control Iraq’s
oil. She said the world had reached
“peak oil” and it was going to become an increasingly precious resource.
I had
recently attended a conference at Antioch
College where experts from around
the country said the world had, indeed, reached peak oil production and in
declining years, nations would be scrambling to obtain as much as possible.
Ms. Noar-Obed pointed to the “Project for the New American
Century” as evidence that part of the motivation in going to Iraq was for the
oil and to increase our military presence in the Middle Eastern region to
protect our “interests.”
According
to the encyclopedia Wikipedia, the Project for the
New American Century (PNAC) is a U.S.
political, neo-conservative think tank based in Washington
D.C.
In 1997 it was established as a non-profit organization with the goal of
promoting US
global leadership.
Present and
former members include prominent members of the Republican Party and the Bush
Administration, including Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney,
Lewis “Scooter” libby,
former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld,
Paul Wolfowitz…
If, in fact,
part of the U.S.
motivation for being in Iraq
is to control the oil, this would be in direct conflict with Just War Principle
as well.
Part of the
criteria reads: “One cannot go to war
simply to expand one’s sphere of influence, conquer new territory, subjugate
peoples, or obtain wealth (natural resources).
One can only go to war to counter aggression.”
Gene
Schwarz (mentioned earlier), who teaches about Islam and the Arab World, said
he is convinced that America went to Iraq for the oil and not weapons of mass
destruction. He said America
needed to assure itself of more of a source of oil in the Middle East and that we would be welcomed as “liberators” (after
the Iraq War). This would then give us,
in effect, “free access to oil,” Schwarz asserted.
Note: Ms. Noar-Obed
said another consistent dynamic she observed on her last trip to Baghdad
was the erosion of trust between neighbors there. She said because of the war, many people in Baghdad
were living in desperate poverty.
Overlaid on this, the U.S.
is offering rewards for information leading to the arrest of al Qaida suspects. So
now it is not uncommon, she continued, for a neighbor to turn another neighbor
in, even if they have no affiliation with the resistance. Ms. Noar-Obed said
this is creating even more tension in the neighborhoods.
9) new
guidelines for torture?
As the last
scenario could be considered mental torture, in this war (and in the “War on
Terror” in general), the Bush administration has opened the door for torture,
which had been playing out in “secret prisons” throughout Europe,
according to reports.
This is in
direct violation with Article 17 of the Geneva Convention: “No physical or mental
torture, nor any other form of coercion may be inflicted on a prisoner
of war.”
The Bush
administration has argued that the insurgents in Iraq,
and terrorists in general, are not “war combatants.” And thus, Article 17 does not apply.
Our
administration would look at suspected terrorists as war combatants and we
would hold to Article 17.
So would Winona,
Minnesota’s Mike Leutgeb-Munsen.
I talked
with him shortly after a trip he’d taken to Washington
D.C. in January 2007, to protest torture
and illegal detainment of terrorist suspects (including some from Iraq)
at the U.S. Guantanamo Bay prison facility.
Leutgeb-Munsen said he is adamantly opposed to
torture. He said that not only is it
cruel and an affront to a person’s human dignity; but it also tears at the
fabric of community-building between nations, creating even more international
animosity.
As an
example, the pictures of torture and degradation coming out of the Abu- Ghraib Prison scandal in Iraq,
inflamed many in the Arab world and galvanized even more hate toward the United
States.
According
to the paper The Iraq Quagmire by America’s Institute of Policy Studies,
with the U.S. violating the Geneva Convention in regard to torture, it will
make it more likely that in the future, other nations will also ignore these
Geneva protections in their treatment of civilian populations and
detainees.
And this is
just one of many issues that the paper raises.
10) costs
to the world
The Iraq
Quagmire paper also points out that the focus on Iraq
has diverted international resources and attention away from humanitarian
crisis such as in Sudan. (What is happening in Sudan
is now consistently being labeled as genocide.)
In Americus,
Georgia, I interviewed
Felix Lohitai.
(He was here on an Earlham College
(Indidana) trip to look at American Civil Rights
history.) Lohitai
fought with the resistance movement in Sudan.
He and his family eventually became refugees.
Lohitai
said the cycle of oppression and violence in the Sudan
was unrelenting and extreme. He is currently a Peace Studies major at Earlham
who wants to take what he is learning (in the way of peace building and
reconciliation strategies) back to his people.
The Iraq
Quagmire also points out that the $204.4 billion (2004 figure) spent on the
war could have cut world hunger in half and covered HIV/AIDS medicine,
childhood immunization and clean water and sanitation needs of the developing
world for almost three years. By mid
2006, the War figure had reached $320 billion.
On a
campaign stop in Stephens Point, Wisconsin, University
of Wisconsin Environmental Professor George Kraft
told me the world is running out of fresh water because man is polluting,
diverting and depleting it at a startling rate.
However, way more funds could be marshaled to reverse this – if the
money wasn’t being ‘diverted’ for other things, like the Iraq War.
And as far as using some of this money to curb Third World poverty in
general… In Colorado I
listened to a talk by Kathy Darnell who had just returned from a humanitarian
aid trip to Uganda. She said she stayed in a one-room hut with a
mother and three children who all had AIDS.
(The husband had already died of AIDS.)
They cooked on an open fire outside the hut and slept on burlap bags on
a dirt floor. And this is not the
exception in this country, she said.
I said to
the Range News in Arizona that
part of my stance was based on Vatican II teaching about “Preferential Option
for the Poor.” And I told the Cheyenne
(WY) Eagle newspaper that that means I believe we should be making the poor
(both in the United States,
and worldwide) a top priority.
And again
looking at the domino effect internationally, The Iraq Quagmire paper
points out that the U.S.-led war and occupation in Iraq
has galvanized international terrorist organizations, placing people, not only
in Iraq, but
around the world, at greater risk of attack.
In 2002
world military spending was $795 billion.
With the skyrocketing costs of the war in Iraq,
worldwide military spending soared to an estimated $956 billion in 2003 and in
2004 the figure spiked again to $1,035 trillion.
Again, this
is money that could have been used to significantly help stem world hunger,
disease, pollution…
11) costs
to the U.S.
Here in the
U.S. the Iraq
War is taking quite a toll as well. The
Institute for Policy Studies reports that more than 210,000 of the National
Guard’s 330,000 soldiers have been called up.
Of these, some 30,000 small business owners alone have been called to
service and are likely to be hurt economically because of their military
deployment.
In the
category of U.S.
budget and social programs, the Institute for Policy Studies notes the $204.4
billion appropriated for the Iraq War (so far) could have provided: healthcare
for 46,458,805 American citizens; 1,841,833 affordable housing units; 24,072
new elementary schools…
The Iraq Quagmire
paper also notes that as of May 2005, stop-loss orders are affecting 14,082
soldiers. What’s more, long deployments
and high levels of soldier’s stress extend to family life. In 2004, 3,325 Army officer marriages ended
in divorce – up 78% from 2003.
This is
coupled with the domino of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) playing out in
military families, divorce or not.
According
to The Iraq Quagmire paper, the Army’s Surgeon General reported that 30%
of U.S. troops
have developed stress-related mental health problems three to four months after
coming home from Iraq.
In Cleveland,
I talked with Chris Knestric whose father was a
decorated Vietnam Veteran. Knestric said growing up he and his siblings were
continually stressed by the father’s flashbacks, mood swings, anger… The marriage eventually broke up.
As a former
mental health counselor, I’ve observed how PTSD can leave children stressed and
angry. The trans-generational component
is this stress turns into all sorts of anxiety disorders, and for instance,
attendant alcoholism or drug abuse problems. As some of these children grow up,
repressed anger issues also emerge and get vented in domestic violence, or
violence on the streets.
So the
long-term effect of war gets played out in many generations to come and tear at
the fabric of family and society in general.
And
finally, Veteran’s Administration Secretary Jim Nicholson projected that
103,000 U.S.
troops would return home from Afghanistan
and Iraq
seeking medical care.
Our
administration would work stridently to make sure veterans had as quality
physical and mental health healthcare as possible.
However, we
would have been more considered about going to war in the first place and
putting them in a position where they would need this kind of care.
Joe media quotes on Iraq (cont.)
“Our
administration proposes a U.S.
Department of Peace. When we get to
really know people, we’re not as apt to bomb them, and much more apt to help
them,” [said
Schriner] --Inherit the Earth
newspaper, Cleveland, Ohio.
To
decrease dependence on foreign oil, [Schriner] suggested looking at ways to use
alternative sources, such as electric cars and solar homes… -- Salem
(OH) News
