I love my country, but we have turned down a very wrong road. As I write, it appears that the U.S. and British militaries have more or less conquered the land of Babylon. I hope that the next Iraqi government will be kind to its people, but I’d be most surprised if that government doesn’t turn out to be remarkably friendly to U.S. business interests. Saddam Hussein wasn’t the only dictator around who tortures and kills his own people. As long as we are in the business of making the world a kinder place, I hope that we will now remove U.S. support from some of the other murderous thugs whom we have previously counted as “friends.” But I’m not holding my breath.
         Are we safer now? Or will this war only serve to inflame the zeal of what Egyptian president and U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak called “a hundred bin Ladens”?
         When violent extremists blow up our buildings, we call it terror; when we blow up buildings in Iraq--which no shred of evidence has tied to September 11--we call it “operations,” or part of a “campaign.” But the “collateral damage” is intense, and thousands of people are and will be dying deaths of excruciating pain or will suffer severe and permanent disabilities because of the vicious attack that has been carried out in your name and in my name.
         I hope that the cries of “support our troops” will resound in Congress the next time budgeting for veterans’ disability benefits is discussed. “Gulf War Syndrome” probably stems largely from our use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions in 1991. Soldiers weren’t told about DU at the time, and the Pentagon has sought to downplay or avoid the issue of Gulf War Syndrome ever since. I hope that not too many of the current war’s veterans will get sick or die or have malformed babies from our use--again--of depleted uranium.
         A waste product from the manufacture of nuclear bombs, depleted uranium is one of the hardest substances on the planet. Tip a missile with DU, and it cuts through armor like a knife through butter. Works great, and solves the military’s “recycling” problem as well. Depleted uranium burns at 5000 degrees; thus it has been vaporized in thousands of explosions over the past several weeks, spreading radiation far beyond the battlefields of Iraq to wherever the four winds bloweth. This material will be radioactive for several million years. Cancer and birth defects have increased sharply in Iraq since the first Gulf War, including many cases of babies born without eyes.
         I love my country, but I am deeply ashamed to be an American right now. Our attack has been both illegal under international law and also morally wrong. Kill one person, it’s murder; kill thousands, it’s foreign policy. And we self-righteously flipped a giant middle finger directly in the face of the rest of the world. It’s not going to serve our own country’s best interests, even if we do manage to restore order, to corner the market on the lucrative reconstruction of Iraq, and to get our corporate hands on all that oil--all while carving out a stronger foothold in the biblical land of Eden.
         I have no doubt that Saddam Hussein was violent and ruthless and that many Iraqis are ecstatic to be rid of him. We will see if the next phase of Iraqi life includes the great blessings we have so strongly advertised. History will show the long-term consequences of this war. But I’m pretty worried about the apparent short-term “lessons”: that might makes right, that we don’t have to care about world opinion, and that we can solve our problems with violence. I’m not exceptionally confident that our government is not now planning attacks in Syria, Iran, or North Korea.  North Korea has just withdrawn from a nuclear non-proliferation treaty, saying that in light of an aggressive United States, it has to “defend itself.” Our leaders will undoubtedly feel that they have to “deal with” this threat. When and where does it all end?
         Around April 10, I saw a small notice on page three of our local daily newspaper stating that several Members of Congress had proposed a new national “Department of Peace,” with a cabinet-level Secretary of Peace. Such a department would stand alongside and help to balance the Department of Defense, which used to be more honestly called the War Department. One might reasonably argue that the government’s work for peace should be coordinated by the Department of State, but nevertheless, it appears that this important congressional proposal was considered so ludicrous that it didn’t merit a headline. Why?
         There were other ways--internationally legitimate ways--to respond to Saddam Hussein. A peaceful world requires the rule of law, rather than the constant threat of gun and bomb. By ignoring world opinion and international law, we have done a terrible disservice to the hopes for long-term world peace. Since the U.S. government and much of the American public doesn’t seem overly concerned about many of the other violent and ruthless kings and “presidents” and dictators spread across the world, I conclude that Saddam Hussein’s wickedness only provided a gigantic excuse for something that we wanted to do anyway, something very shameful. I love my country, but I strongly oppose the actions of our current government. I am a patriot for peace.
        (April 15, 2003)