Volume 96, Issue 85
Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Search the Archives:

HOME
PHOTO GALLERY

COMICS
SUBMIT LETTER
CONTESTS
ADVERTISING
VOLUNTEERS
ABOUT US
ARCHIVES
LINKS



Playing nice has a name

Re: "Threats won't go," Mar. 6

To the Editor:

In his letter, Jeff Armour expressed his dismay at the world's lack of support for the imminent United States' war on Iraq. He stated that if we don't support the war effort now, then we'll have no one else to blame but ourselves when terror hits home.

Armour overlooks a major force that helped get the world into the desperate state it now finds itself in – the gung-ho, might-makes-right, cultural and economic imperialism that characterizes U.S. international relations.

Is unilateral aggression on the part of America really going to solve anything? In my opinion, it will only exacerbate the situation by further alienating the U.S. from its allies and from the Arab world.

Armour's statement that even his local minister would have been willing to pick up arms to "get rid of the evil force" behind Sept. 11 gave me nightmares.

While the acts of Sept. 11 were indeed heinous, they have not been conclusively linked to Iraq and can't be used as justification for a war against that nation. Furthermore, I see a startling parallel between Armour's hypothetical gun-toting minister and the Islamic extremist terrorists he so adamantly seeks to obliterate through war.

It seems Armour has really bought into Bush's "good versus evil" rhetoric. Well, Jeff, I've got news for you: this conflict isn't about "good versus evil" as much as it is about politics, regime change, vengeance and... oh yeah, oil.

Playing nice has a name: diplomacy. It's what we, as a civilized world, should strive to use to resolve our conflicts. I'm sure the millions of antiwar protesters worldwide would agree.

Laura Boudreau
MIT I

EDITORIAL

LETTERS

Contact The Opinions Department

2002 THE GAZETTE