Pessimism(ce#3)

Many people claim Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, reportedly tortured and killed his own people. These events were not, at least to my knowledge, American headlines. But since American forces went into Iraq (for unjustified and possibly illegal reasons) and arrested/executed Saddam, the country of Iraq (which to my knowledge has not seen too many years of peace) has been leaderless and without guidance. Now American citizens are bombarded daily with gruesome pictures and headlines of the daily fatalities in Iraq. The question I want to ask is would Iraq be better off if Saddam was still in control as apposed to the Civil War that is raging there now.

April 5th my wonderful university hosted two highly educated professors, Professors Allan Stam of Dartmouth College and Allen Weiner of Stanford Law School, who spoke about the receptacle of evil that has become the once beautiful country of Iraq. Give a Google search for more information on these two awesome intellectuals.

Professor Doctor Allen Stam is a professor of Government at Dartmouth College and gave some interesting information on the civil war in Iraq, calling it a “Super Civil War” due to the number of lives lost, (60-70,000) and the duration of time that the war has been going on. Stam also pointed out two types of invasive wars; pre-emptive and preventive. Pre-emptive is an internationally known legal type where you strike a country first before they strike you and preventive which is an illegal type where you attack someone before you THINK they will. Stam explained something that helped me understand why Iraq is in such a state of disarray is the many different religious and ethnic groups in Iraq. He noted that approximately 60% of the population was Shia and the other 40% was comprised mainly of Kurds, 20%, and Sunni, 20%. As we know in a democracy the power goes to the majority, being the Shia, and therefore the money and consequently the guns. As history reveals the Sunni under Saddam did not treat the Shia too well and now many Shia are taking this opportunity to avenge themselves.

Professor doctor Allen Weiner of Stanford Law School released some interesting information about the civil war in Iraq comparing it others throughout history. Weiner also spoke about the Bush administration’s push on calling Iraq a “War on Terror” because during a war it is internationally acceptable for those soldiers to kill one another. If Iraq is labeled a Civil War the conditions on which American soldiers are allowed to engage the insurgents changes and makes the legality of killing more difficult. Also included in his speech were Guantanamo Bay’s faults and legalities. During a state of war prisoners of war are allowed to be held at a detention centers and that most of the debate is over whether or not the captores are affiliated or apart of Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist group. Torture was also on the agenda, Weiner’s opinion stating it was legal, “during a state of war” (again drawing attention of whether or not the US is in a state of war)

By the time I walked out I felt enlightened. I already knew the basics of what these professors were saying but the specifics and the additional emphasis they gave were very enriching. I can say that witnessing the Iraq war unfold and evolve is definitely an ‘early’ lesson for me for when it comes time for me to decide again whether or not my country's armed forced should go to war.