I was going to post this last night, but I decided that yesterday was a terrible enough day to warrant abstaining from my weblog. In case you locked yourself in your basement all day to play Grand Theft Auto and are just now wandering into consciousness, “President” Bush [quotes intentional] issued an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein: leave the country in 48 hours, or be attacked

What crime has Saddam committed that warrants such aggression? Bush’ claims boil down to three points. First, Iraq supports terrorism and is inextricably linked to the attacks of 9/11. Second, Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction in violation of numerous U.N. resolutions. Third, the Hussein regime is committing acts of violence against Iraqi citizens, particularly Kurds and other ethnic minorities. Of these three accusations, only the third can be proven. Apparently, the norm of presuming innocence does not apply to the Bush administration’s foreign policymaking. Without any evidence to link Hussein to bin Laden, Bush has resorted to generalized claims of wrong-doing on the part of Iraq’s government. Certainly, it is true that Saddam is waging a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Kurdish minorities in Northern Iraq. And that, in itself, might be sufficient justification for a humanitarian intervention that demands the protection of Kurds’ human rights.

But no. That’s not what Bush is really concerned about, and every speech he gives provides even more evidence of this unfortunate fact. The Kurds, and others characterized as Saddam’s “own people”, are being used as chess pieces in the Bush administration’s attempts to built support for its war of aggression. Not only is this an unethical means by which to sway public and international opinion, but it is also plainly immoral - it ignores the dignity of those it purports to “save”. For this, the President should be ashamed.

Even more disturbing is Bush’ refusal to recognize the contradiction between our demands on Iraq and our own foreign policy. While we stockpile nuclear weapons and refuse to ratify international treaties like the CTBT, our government demands that other nations not be allowed to develop these same weapons. This “do as we say, not as we do” mentality is doomed to fail - what Chief of State would elect not to pursue the development of WMDs if such weapons are a status symbol that grant a nation valuable diplomatic currency? Certainly not one as ambitious and paranoid as Saddam Hussein. And yet, after years of economic sanctions in the aftermath of a devastating war, Bush has the gall to claim that “The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. (Transcript)” Not only that, but “the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war,” a ridiculous ode to the mockery of a process that has occurred over the last several months.

There is one portion of Bush’ speech that I wholeheartedly agree with:

“The United States, with other countries, will work to advance liberty and peace in that region. Our goal will not be achieved overnight, but it can come over time. The power and appeal of human liberty is felt in every life and every land. And the greatest power of freedom is to overcome hatred and violence, and turn the creative gifts of men and women to the pursuits of peace. That is the future we choose.”

These goals are laudable and the pursuit of peaceful progress is admirable. But a strategy which relies on fighting wars to preserve peace is non-sensical double-talk that would make George Orwell proud. This war, soon to end the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, makes me feel terrible to be an American. Enough is enough. Wake up America - do you really want these deaths on your conscience and in your name?