ntenders for the November presidential election both support the Iraq war—although both draw distinctions on the tactics of the other—for to do otherwise would be political suicide.

To be antiwar is generally perceived to be weak, naïve or blatantly un-American.

And the perception is not unfounded. Considering the number of military conflicts we’ve fought in the last hundred years, it would be difficult to argue that “peace” is an American value.

The current issue is Iraq. Blaming George W. Bush and his administration of militarists only goes so far. America is still enough of a democracy that the people can have an impact on governmental policy. If sixty percent of constituents had contacted their national representatives to express outrage at Mr. Bush’s rush to war, over 900 of their fellow citizens might still be alive today.

Ultimately, the fault lies not in our leaders, but in ourselves.

It starts with laziness. The average American has probably spent more time researching an automobile purchase than they did researching the validity of their government’s evidence for war. In fact, the Bush administration sold this war like it was selling a used car—and the American people should have applied the same skepticism to their words as they would to any profit-hungry sales team. Not to belabor the analogy, but we got stuck with a lemon of a war—unnecessary, unfinished, probably unwinnable—while Bush, Cheney, and their corporate sponsors continue to draw a “sales commission” from the American tax coffers.

An informed electorate could have seen this coming.

Once the shooting starts, laziness merges with a warped sense of patriotism. When you’re out driving around, just count the bumper stickers—American flags with gung-ho slogans (“Standing Tall!” or “Don’t Mess With U.S.!”) To disagree with George W. Bush’s militarism is deemed anti-American; to criticize war policy is declared treasonous.

A rational electorate would repudiate this cowardly strategy.

If polls are to be believed, the American public was lukewarm to this war prior to the invasion; once troops were committed, support increased dramatically. Now, the public is losing interest and a slight majority believes the war was—in retrospect—a mistake. The latest results are attributed to a run of bad news—continuing casualties, disappearing rationales for the war, atrocities on both sides, the ongoing financial burden.

There is a self-serving inconsistency here, just as we saw with Lila Lipscomb—the woman featured in Michael Moore’s documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. She supported the war—putting blind faith in the government—until her son was killed in Iraq. Now she blames Mr. Bush, and his deception, for the death of her son. Up to a point, she’s right. But the unquestioning patriotism she instilled in her son was a contributing factor as well; that, and the blank check of trust she wrote out to Mr. Bush. Her grief is understandable; but didn’t she realize that her son’s job would be to kill other mother’s sons (and daughters)? Watching the pain of her loss, it’s easy to sympathize emotionally—but not morally.

Like Ms. Lipscomb, many more American families may soon face the chance to reject Mr. Bush’s war policies based on personal experience. Consider two recent news items:

From the New York Times (7/22/04): “In what critics say is another sign of increasing stress on the military, the Army has been forced to bring more new recruits immediately into the ranks to meet recruiting goals for 2004, instead of allowing them to defer entry until the next accounting year…‘I worry about this every single day—recruiting and retention,’ said General Hagenbeck…‘We are recruiting a volunteer force during a time of war. We’ve never done that before.’”

From CNN (7/19/04): “Iran is harboring members of al Queda, and the United States is investigating whether the Iranian government had a role in the September 11, 2001 attacks, President Bush said.” Add to this Mr. Bush’s comments three months ago: “The development of a nuclear weapon in Iran is intolerable…they will be dealt with…”

The American war machine is having difficulty meeting its current needs; and now Iran is accused of the same offenses that prompted the Iraq war. Of course, the government assures us that a military draft is not even being considered. This is the same government that told us how many tons of chemical and biological weapons were in Iraq—and where they were hidden. The same government that told us we’d be greeted as liberators. That Iraqi oil would pay for Iraq’s reconstruction.

It’s time for all Americans to put aside laziness and warped patriotism, and to ask ourselves: Would you buy a new war from this administration?

Charles Cutter

July 22, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------