Colleagues and Friends, 

I arrived home tonight and felt compelled to write down my thoughts about the war in Iraq and how we are reacting to it. For the record, I oppose any war that's unnecessary. I also have a problem with the U.S. starting a war to prevent some hypothetical future tragedy. Thirdly, I anguish over the Congress dodging its responsibility to declare or prevent war. Yet, now that war is upon us, I believe the issue for me at this point is not whether President Bush is right or wrong to wage war against Iraq, but rather, the well-being (both physical and emotional) of our men and women in harms way and how we can minimize the damage to life and the perception of America throughout the world. I'm concerned about the divisive tone of the rhetoric I've seen on line recently, although I understand the frustration on both sides. To continue to engage in the propaganda war is counterproductive at all levels. We face a great challenge as a people and a nation. We must find a unified voice to usher America into a new era, one we may not yet understand.

I'm convinced the President is attacking Iraq because he believes it's the right thing to do. I want to believe it's not about oil for the U.S. and for the French and Germans and others it's not about economics; it's about people standing by their principles. Having stood, myself, just last week at the brink of the gaping void that was once the World Trade Center, I can easily understand why the President feels a sense of urgency and a strong desire to protect America. But I reflect on my own experience as a father to guide me. When I become overly protective, invariably my children are unnecessarily deprived of their freedom and I am guilty of underestimating their innate common sense. 

Being old enough to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis I vividly recall the pictures on television. The government was more concerned about informing its citizens than protecting a few sources of intelligence. There was little dissent because we were all in the loop. In other words, they trusted us with the truth. Once we lose that kind of relationship with our leaders we can no longer call ourselves a democracy. Hence, the real casualty, or at least the one that will be crippled for years to come (even after the shooting and bombing has stopped) is our faith in the American way of life.

Hence, I am also gravely concerned about the huge *credibility gap (I haven't seen anything like this since Viet Nam) and caustic diplomacy (Isn't that an oxymoron?) of this administration. Again, President Bush is sincere in his belief that his actions are moral. He may even be right if enough was known. So it's not what he's done (even though I believe it's the wrong approach), it's how he's done it that has contributed to the fears that many of us feel about our future as a nation and our role on the world stage. It's similar to what some of my friends who are police officers have told me. Sometimes if they truly believe a suspect is guilty, they will lie or even plant evidence and feel they are doing the right thing. (I'm not suggesting most officers do this). The President and his operatives may not have overtly lied but they have stretched the truth to the point of the absurd. (Every rumor was granted the status of fact). What these officers and the President have forgotten is that the real strength of our nation is not our weapons; it's our democracy, the rule of law and due process. A free and educated people are capable of evaluating the facts and making intelligent decisions. Congress is capable of exercising its constitutional duty. The U.N. is capable of resolving international problems.

Some have said that it's a different world; that we cannot wait until disaster strikes. The enemy lurks amongst us and so we must act preemptively. I say that when we adopt this position the line between us and them is blurred. Terrorists lash out indiscriminately because they lack access to processes that provide a sense of justice. Our own government missed the opportunity to legitimize its actions by not working forthrightly with the United Nations. A just war, if there is such a thing, is deemed so because all other options are tried first. I don't care how many years inspections would have contimued as long as they were producing some benefits and helping contain Iraq. Now, instead, much of the rest of the world feels we have undermined efforts that could have yielded satisfactory results. We sought access to a deliberative body but chose to ignore its voice. What lesson has the world learned from this? What was the point of going to the U.N.?

Again, as a father, I sometimes find myself on the wrong side of an issue. I fear that if I admit my mistakes my children will see me as weak or foolish. It's tempting to use my authority to convince them they're wrong; after all, I'm the father. Without fail, however, when I admit I'm wrong (especially since it's obvious by then anyway) I win and deserve their respect, or at least I'm credible. There will be a moment when the President must make a decision about whether this war can continue. Hopefully the decision will be the result of a quick victory with minimal loss of life. If not, will he have the courage to admit he has made a mistake, even if such a thought occurs to him? Is it better to go on killing than to admit we are wrong? Lyndon Johnson faced a similar situation after he realized he could not win in Viet Nam. He chose not to seek re-election rather than face the American voters' rebuke.

Let's face it! None of us really know what the truth is about this war. We don't have enough information, and even if we did our partisanship would still influence our judgment. So let's show respect for one another and let's keep some perspective. Let's stop the rhetoric and engage in real dialogue. After all, we're not the ones directly facing the impending annihilation of a bomb or the barrel of a gun, at least I hope not yet. We still have time to be open-minded and civil, however passionate in our beliefs.

 

Tom Bissonette
Counseling and Career Planning Center
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
305 Pfeiffer Hall
Chattanooga, TN 37403

 

Phone: (423) 425-4438

 

*credibility gap

NOUN: 1. Public skepticism about the truth of statements, especially official claims and pronouncements: "The credibility gap [is] the result of a deliberate policy of artificial manipulation of official news" (Walter Lippmann).

2. Lack of trustworthiness.

3. A discrepancy or disparity, especially between words and actions. 

 Source: American Heritage Dictionary

 

Tom Bissonette
Counseling and Career Planning Center
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
305 Pfeiffer Hall
Chattanooga, TN 37403



Phone: (423) 425-4438