a short point about teaching about Iraq

I had a heartening experience with my students when discussing the probably U.S. military attack on Iraq. It was heartening because many of the students demonstrated the ability to analyze these issues with some depth.

 

I said to them: "President Bush has claimed that Saddam Hussein is an ally of Osama bin-Laden, and that the combination of Saddam's military strength and bin-Laden's alleged involvement in mass terror in New York make it important for the U.S. to attack Iraq soon."

 

"Here's a question: Saddam Hussein has an iron-clad grip on Iraq for the time being. He is a powerful dictator who has eliminated all serious opposition and seems to have a stable hold on controlling Iraq, which has the second largest known oil reserves in the world.  Osama bin-Laden is the leader of a group which controls no land in particular. They engage in violent acts for the purpose of destabilizing the oil-rich region (also, the Islamic region) from Morocco on the Atlantic to Indonesia on the Pacific. His goal seems to be to position himself as the champion of the angry Muslim youth."

 

"Now, if you were Osama bin-Laden, would you want the U.S. military to strike hard at Iraq, overthrow Saddam Hussein, and involve tens of thousands of U.S. troops in ground fighting, and including probably having to occupy Iraq? Or would you rather have the U.S. back off and leave Saddam Hussein alone?"

 

(Note: of course I don't know what Saddam Hussein or Osama bin-Laden think about, but having a knowledge of political and military history, one can consider various possibilities....)

 

A significant number of my students thought for a minute, and then said: "Come to think of it, Osama bin-Laden probably wants the U.S. to attack Iraq. It would get rid of Saddam, who could be a rival to bin-Laden, and it would tie up U.S. troops, and it would further destabilize the region and anger tens of millions of Muslim youth, and all that would probably strengthen bin-Laden's ability to build his forces up."

 

In other words, attacking Saddam Hussein would not strengthen the "war against terrorism". If anything, it would probably strengthen bin-Laden. Which means that this attack on Iraq really has nothing to do with stopping the current group of "suspected terrorists."  It has to do with something else.......any guesses?

 

As I said, many of my seemingly apolitical students enthusiastically got into the discussion. It also made me wonder where the polls get their numbers about how much support Bush has from the American people for this attack. I know almost nobody who supports it, and everyone I ask says the same thing....they know hardly anyone also. Of course when the battle starts, many will go over to that position out of loyalty or fear for the U.S. troops' safety. But in any case, I don't think the numbers currently are anywhere NEAR the fifty percent or so that we keep hearing.

 

Just some (unscientific) thoughts....

 

Alan Spector