BETWEEN a Bush & AROCK

its almost a year since president bush called out saddam hussein to the schoolyard for a fight. at first it seemed very confusing. why iraq? why saddam hussein? on the heels of the september 11th attack on the united states by osama bin laden's 'troops', most of whom came from saudi arabia, why would he name an "axis of evil" that didnt include either one of those perpetrators? so, after launching a blitzkreig type assualt on afghanistan and occupying the country, mr. bush came out this summer on the real threat...iraq!?

in a well orchestrated campaign to paint saddam hussein as the dr. evil of the 21st century, he began a program to force a regime change in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and hasnt made any problems for us since the 1991 gulf war. regardless of the details, we are now on the verge of...with or without the support of the rest of the world, a serious world changing conflict. we have been told by our leader that iraq's leader is evil and poses serious threats to us and the rest of the world. the rest of the world doesnt seem to feel so strongly about it, but take his word for it, he is a 'bad guy' who wants to do harm to you.

now that we have a motive and our troops are ready to go, all thats left is for president bush to say 'go'. that will be when all the predictions and forecasts for what will happen go out the window and the real chaos starts. just imagine the news coverage of this conflict. forget "the bachelor" or "meet the parents" or even "american idol", ratings on this war will be great. i think the only reason he's waiting for the state of the union address is so that the war doesnt pre-empt the super bowl!

i dont mean to be so calous about a war that i beleive will see more U.S. casualties then the vietnam war, but what are we doing messing around in a part of the world where most sentiment towards the U.S. and its efforts is well, not very sentimental. if we cant convince the arabs to take saddam out of power, then why are we willing to stir this hornets nest? the administration claims its got nothing to do with the OIL, yet there are much more serious and immediate issues to resolve in nuclear korea and even in venezuela. so why send 150,000 troops halfway around the world to attack a country that has allowed UN inspectors back in and is at least verbally complying with almost all our demands? i dont know the answer and i am very fearful of the consequences of our actions.

could it be that bush thinks this battle will help the economy? 1991 proved that just winning a war doesnt guarantee re-election, so that is the only thing i can think of because if saddam acts 1/2 as badly as he did in 1991, we are in for a hell of a time over there. during our great victory, iraq launched some 40 scud missles at israel, they pillaged kuwaits' riches and destroyed property. and after we pushed the iraqi army out of kuwait, they blew up 600 oil wells in the dessert of kuwait causing an economic and enviromental disaster. and that was just for sending them back home. what will happen when we go after their territory and try to take out saddam? all i know is that the predictions being made now will prove to be wrong and he will do something that is unexpected. hopefully he will heed mr. bush's warning not to use nukes or chemicals but why should he bother listening if he is going to be destroyed. might as well go out with a bang...no pun inteneded!

and if anything like that does happen, it surely wont help our economy.

this is way too scary for even me to keep writing about so i'll stop now and wait for a more reasonable outcome.

have a grateful day!
larry