Title

(Chapel Hill News; Feb. 2003; CH Friends' Meeting)

On Feb. 13, David E. Sanger wrote in the New York Times, " In the weeks following the defeat of the Taliban and the scattering of al-Qaida in Afghanistan, the Bush administration was consumed with internal debate about where to take the war on terrorism next. Now, by all indications, the debate is largely over: toppling Saddam Hussein is the next major goal, and the administration is putting in place the diplomatic and militray means to accomplish it."

We believe this development is profoundly distrubing. In order to " topple" Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist government, thousand more innocent Iraqi men, women and children will be killed, perhaps hundreds of American military also will die. The military strategy is clear: massive bo9mbing of every possible target followed by invasion by ground troops. According to Alexander Nicoli, writing in the Financial Times of London on Feb. 16, " Removing the Baghdad Dictator?would require a full-scale military campaign?a war against Iraq could require the mbilization of U.S. air power and ground troops on an even greater scale than the 1991 Gulf War."

Apparently the Bush strategists believe there would be little resistance. This was the assumption of the Pentagon and the CIA at the time of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. Fidel Castro is still in power. Assuming Saddam Hussein and his government are banished, a destroyed Iraq would be left with no government. Would the United States forces then leave or act an occupying power? The United States runs the risk of losing its allied support. Even more serious would be the effect on millions of people in the Middle East. The Chapel Hill Friends Meeting (Quaker) urgently calls on our representatives in Washington and our fellow citizens to resist this march toward war and massive destruction.