|
Editorials: Editoriality Archives - Animations Commentary Pandora's Box! Video What Is? Contact Us Voices of the People Home |
Gotta love the Drudgereport. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" (--William Shakespeare: Hamlet, Prince of Denmark). I would’ve never known Dave Matthews’ (of the "Dave Matthews Band" Dave Matthews) political bent if he hadn’t put his views on Iraq on the home page of his fan site, and I wouldn’t have even known it was there if Drudge hadn’t called attention to it. Thank you, Drudge, for this opportunity.
I read Mr. Matthews’ small treatise on why we should not go to war with Iraq. I had little doubt that the guy who penned the immortal words "My head won’t leave my head alone" could have the philosophical wherewithal to write down a well-thought-out opinion on the Iraq matter. I’ve always surmised that the guy who incorporates jazz so casually in his rock-and-roll works was capable of higher thought, and now I know for sure, that unlike his quasi-contemporary, Eric Clapton, he can read!
That’s not to say that Mr. Matthews can read between the lines. I realize that after long days and months of performing, being surrounded by handmaidens and hazy opiates, it’s hard to get a clear picture of what is really going on in the world. After all, your audience is comprised of youth, and I know that in my youth, I was an easily-jaded and -clouded moderate-to-liberal. At age 20, I didn’t want to die in war any more than I wanted to die. Although there were some nights after mixing one drink too many I really began to wonder about my respect for my own life. I now realize that human life is a huge asset, a powerful commodity, a once-in-a- lifetime thing. What Hollywood and the professional entertainment elite of this world fail to understand about Joes like me in the flyover area is that just because I lean conservative, doesn’t mean I have a clear conscience about using my tax money to send soldiers to die in a foreign land. War is appaling, abhorrent and should always be the used as the last resort.
But if Mr. Matthews and his cronies in the entertainment world would read a little history instead of the San Francisco Examiner, it would become apparent, if not crystal clear, that one cannot negotiate peace with a man like Saddam Hussein.
Since Mr. Matthews did not provide a forum for discussion or response (or at least one that I can find), I would like to, in classic Socratic style, pick him apart like a Thanksgiving turkey:
"I want to speak my mind about this war with Iraq, or I will choke on my conscience."
We wouldn’t want that. Voice difficulties might inhibit sales.
"What is the motivation? Regime change? Shouldn't that be up to the people of the region and the people of Iraq?"
Sadly, Mr. Matthews assumes that other nations of the world have a constitutional democracy like we do in the U.S. They don’t have a Second Amendment in Iraq. Even if the Iraqis wanted to implement a regime change in their country, they couldn’t because they don’t have any guns! They couldn’t implement a free election because Saddam Hussein is the only candidate! All others are shot or summarily dealt with!
"The only real threat from Saddam Hussein is to his neighbors and none of them support a U.S. invasion. Is it to stabilize the Middle-East?"
His neighbors do want him out! He’s been a thorn in their sides for years! He went to war with Iran, for crying out loud! (Sorry, I’m yelling. I’ll calm down.) Turkey’s a constitutional democracy and 35,000 of our troops are on their way there without argument (No argument from Turkey, that is!). Troops are in Jordan, and they’re also in Qatar and believe it or not, in Saudi Arabia. Where are you getting your information?
"Wouldn't it only do the opposite by causing further death and suffering in a country that has had more than its share?"
There will be death, yes. But once the war is over -- and we have little reason to believe it won’t be over soon -- people won’t be dying and suffering over there from starvation or from being gassed for their politcal beliefs.
"Is it to weaken Al Qaeda? Saddam Hussein is a genocidal maniac but he is not Al Qaeda. He is certainly more visible though. Is he our target because he is easier to identify than the illusive terrorist network?"
Terrorism makes for strange bedfellows, and if you listened to Secretary Powell’s speech on Feb. 6, you would know that Saddam and al-Q’aeda are in bed together. And why are we splitting hairs over what constitutes a terrorist, anyway? How do you kill a snake, Mr. Matthews? By stepping on its tail? No, you step on its head. By the way, did you mean "elusive"? Are you so isolated in your corner of the world that you think al-Qaeda is a fantasy?
"Surely it is more likely that an attack on Iraq would only strengthen Al Qaeda by feeding Anti-American sentiment. Putting out the fire with gasoline, so to speak. It is certainly not to liberate the people of Iraq who suffer under Hussein's rule, unless we call killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis liberation."
If you paid attention to the last Gulf War and to the liberation of Afghanistan, you would have observed that we can do some pretty amazing things with the military technology we have. I guess you were on tour and missed most of it. True, civilians will be killed; I feel for those folks. But there are 24 million people living in an oppressive regime currently. If 2,000 innocent Iraqis die so that that 24 million can live in freedom, wouldn’t you say it was a justifiable sacrifice? Six million Jews died in the 1940s before we could get our butts over there to liberate them. Is your conscience prepared for that kind of slaughter?
"Saddam Hussein is a barbaric murderous dictator. I wish the world were free of him. But the answer is not to bomb this great culture of Iraq out of existence to stop him. Why must the children of Iraq die by the thousands to stop a tyrant? It is not justice."
This passage is such childish nonsense I find it difficult to respond, but I will try. I have a great appreciation for Mesopotamia and the culture of the Tigris and Euphrates, one of several birthplaces of civilization. But you can’t have a great culture without a great people to perpetuate it. Saddam Hussein does not allow his people to thrive. Saddam allows Saddam to thrive. And while I am not a fan of Islam and the bitter and vengeful spirit it seems to cultivate, I am convinced that there is a culture of people over there who want to do good. Were it that they had access to the resources to improve themselves and their culture (and hence their religion or choice of religion), we might not have so many Muslims in this world who express their disdain. When you live in an oppressed society, your hatred and bitterness has to funnel somewhere. The system as it is does not favor the U.S., so why not angle for something different?
"And if we kill him what will we achieve? We will have taken the most unpopular leader in the Middle East and turned him into the greatest martyr radical Islam has ever had."
Mohammed killed many people, and he is Islam’s most revered prophet. Christianity had many martrys in its early days who died by the hand of an oppressive government, never to be heard from again. Any old cleric can claim any old terrorist is a martyr over there. I would take the martrydom thing with a grain of salt.
"The U.N. weapons inspectors must be allowed to do their job thoroughly and any military action should be internationally agreed upon. We must not allow our government to turn us into a rogue nation."
The U.N.’s had its chance. It passed the resolution. Maybe you’d like to wait until you’re laid up in the hospital with botulism to begin a campaign against Saddam Hussein. And as far as our country, a constitutional democracy, becoming a "rogue nation"? I’ll give you a rogue nation: read the history of France. Once you read about what they did in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, you’ll think we’re the most compassionate country that ever was.
"I fear that our true motivation is about oil and our own flailing economy; about the failure to destroy Al Qaeda and about revenge."
If you paid attention to W’s state of the union address, he wants to earmark funds for hydrogen power research to lessen our dependency on foreign oil. Also, Iraq supplies less than five percent of oil to the U.S. One observation you should make, Mr. Matthews, is that France gets a lot of its oil from Iraq. If anything, we’re saving France’s butt once again.
"It is criminal to put our servicemen and women in harm's way and to put the lives of so many civilians on the line for the misguided frustrations of the Bush administration."
The Bush administration is frustrated because of the mess that eight years of Clinton left. And servicemen and women in this country join the service because they want to serve. They understand the significant role that the U.S. plays in this world. Mr. Matthews, this country is more than just "a member of the UN"; we serve as the lighthouse to the world. We let Europe cannibalize itself in WWI and guess what? WWII happened.
"Bottom line: this war is wrong and this war is un-American."
Demagoguery will get you nowhere.
Peacefully submitted,
Dave Matthews
God bless you, too.
H. L. Demond
