I do not know of any American president who has displayed more eagerness to go to war that George W. Bush. Now, Doug, try to grasp this: I don't care whether it's Bush, Gore, Nader, or Mother Theresa who wants to go to war this badly; I don't care if it's a Republican, a Democrat, a Green, or any party you care to name, this sort of pit-bull aggressiveness is not something I care to see in any human being. It is totally unconscionable in an American president.

Rather than acting on intelligence that he doesn't care to share with the American public, Bush is ignoring the advice and reservations of many members of the military. He is also ignoring warnings by the CIA that an attack on Iraq would not prevent but would guarantee terrorist attacks on the United States (he was angry because of the report itself, and he was furious that the report was made public—so what else does he want to keep hidden?). He is ignoring the reports of weapons inspectors who have been on the scene and who say that Saddam's weaponry is nowhere near as dangerous as Bush claims. He continues to assert Saddam's involvement with 9/11, but has failed to make a convincing connection (if he had one, don't you think he would trumpet it loudly to the world?). He is ignoring the Constitution, and while he's at it, with his Patriot Act and Homeland Security legislation, he is undercutting the Bill of Rights and endangering the very legal and moral foundations upon which this country was built.

Granted, it is a matter of opinion—but—it is an opinion held by much of the world, and by an increasingly large number of Americans, that Bush's desire to go to war with Iraq has much to do with attempting to divert attention from a failed domestic policy in which the economy is a mess, unemployment is on the increase, unchecked corporate greed, corruption, and wholesale thievery have become matters for daily headlines, and already inadequate social, health, and welfare programs are being gutted further still (e.g., his push to turn the Social Security system over to the mercies of Wall Street). German Justice Minister Herta Dauebler-Gmelin said as much, and her remarks caused such a stir that she was forced to resign, not because what she said was untrue, but because she was undiplomatic enough to say it. Also, Bush's desire for a regime change in Iraq has more to do with the fact that Saddam's keister is firmly planted over forty percent of the world's oil reserves that it does with any threat that Saddam might pose or any concern Bush might feel for the welfare of Iraqi citizens.

If indeed Saddam Hussein poses a threat to the United States and/or the rest of the world, then let whatever preventive action deemed necessary be undertaken by a coalition of nations who agree that Saddam Hussein is a threat, and let it be undertaken with the approval of the United Nations. For the United States to launch a preemptive attack against any country, including Iraq, is illegal, immoral, unethical, unconstitutional—and un-American.

It should come as no surprise to you that I don't like George W. Bush. But if it were Al Gore instead of George Bush, I would be just as strongly opposed. It is the intent that is wrong. Not the man per se.

Don Firth