|
My offline comments
were limited to an audience that I thought would tolerate the religious
background experience from which I spoke, which is an undeniable factor in the global
worldview of key players in our government. I did not intend to further bore those who were not
interested in this particular sociological factor. If you have
any acquaintance with the religious heritage of what others call “the Amen
Corner” of the White House and the instinctive reaction many voters have to the
accidental and not-so-accidental coded messages used in casual and formal
speeches, then you might understand my opinion that there is a deep
psychological message from the Judeo-Christian heritage coupled with the identity
of America’s uniqueness driving current events. During the
national press conference Thursday night, the Commander in Chief, with tears in
his eyes, shared his personal gratitude for the untold numbers of Americans who
are praying for him. I do not
disrespect any of it, but it was also an embedded mythological reference to any
number of heroes and unquestioning, loyal but lonely prophets in the wilderness
who also did not enjoy popular support and faced great odds. Likewise, I
have no doubt that many in the Christian community sincerely believe that current
events are following the story of the Hebrews fleeing Egypt, facing a dark sea
while the Pharaoh’s army pursues them, and only blind faith and one
extraordinary man stands between them and the manna in the Promised Land on the
other side. But since I am
not a theologian, and just a middle aged woman tapping into some practical insights,
I can’t say whether any of these who receive and send those embedded messages would
be willing to practice full-strength New Testament gospel you alluded to during
what many believe is “final days” theology. I never could
take Revelations seriously. I heard
in class that the author was marooned, perhaps snake-bitten and deliriously
inspired as he wrote, which sounds plausibly like other creative efforts from authors,
some just bitten by drugs or alcohol, the gods of tragedy, romance or insanity.
The imagery to me was just
imagery, not literal. Maybe I was
ruined by all that classical Greek mythology I read. Perhaps a
former president also known to be deeply religious in this particular brand of
Protestantism can offer a ‘third way’. He is playing the role of wise elder statesman, expending
some of his laurels of glory from former battles to be heard in the public
forum. – Karen Watters Cole
For a war to be just, it must meet several clearly defined
criteria. The war can be waged only as a last resort, with all
nonviolent options exhausted. In
the case of Iraq, it is obvious that clear alternatives to war exist. These
options — previously proposed by our own leaders and approved by the United
Nations — were outlined again by the Security Council on Friday. But now, with
our own national security not directly threatened and despite the overwhelming
opposition of most people and governments in the world, the United States seems
determined to carry out military and diplomatic action that is almost
unprecedented in the history of civilized nations. The first stage of our
widely publicized war plan is to launch 3,000 bombs and missiles on a relatively
defenseless Iraqi population within the first few hours of an invasion, with
the purpose of so damaging and demoralizing the people that they will change
their obnoxious leader, who will most likely be hidden and safe during the
bombardment. The war's weapons must discriminate between combatants and
noncombatants. Extensive aerial bombardment, even with precise accuracy,
inevitably results in "collateral damage." Gen. Tommy R. Franks,
commander of American forces in the Persian Gulf, has expressed concern about
many of the military targets being near hospitals, schools, mosques and private
homes. Its violence must be proportional to the injury we have
suffered. Despite Saddam Hussein's other serious crimes, American
efforts to tie Iraq to the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been unconvincing. The attackers must have legitimate authority sanctioned by the
society they profess to represent. The unanimous vote of approval in the Security Council to eliminate
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction can still be honored, but our announced
goals are now to achieve regime change and to establish a Pax Americana in the
region, perhaps occupying the ethnically divided country for as long as a
decade. For these objectives, we do not have international authority. Other
members of the Security Council have so far resisted the enormous economic and
political influence that is being exerted from Washington, and we are faced
with the possibility of either a failure to get the necessary votes or else a
veto from Russia, France and China. Although Turkey may still be enticed into
helping us by enormous financial rewards and partial future control of the
Kurds and oil in northern Iraq, its democratic Parliament has at least added
its voice to the worldwide expressions of concern. The peace it establishes must be a clear improvement over
what exists.
Although there are
visions of peace and democracy in Iraq, it is quite possible that the aftermath
of a military invasion will destabilize the region and prompt terrorists to
further jeopardize our security at home. Also, by defying overwhelming world
opposition, the United States will undermine the United Nations as a viable
institution for world peace. What about America's world standing if we don't go to war
after such a great deployment of military forces in the region? The heartfelt
sympathy and friendship offered to America after the 9/11 attacks, even from
formerly antagonistic regimes, has been largely dissipated; increasingly
unilateral and domineering policies have brought international trust in our
country to its lowest level in memory. American stature will surely decline
further if we launch a war in clear defiance of the United Nations. But to use
the presence and threat of our military power to force Iraq's compliance with
all United Nations resolutions — with war as a final option — will enhance our
status as a champion of peace and justice. Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States, is
chairman of the Carter Center in Atlanta and winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace
Prize. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/09/opinion/09CART.html Outgoing mail scanned by
NAV 2002 |
<<image001.gif>>
