    |
  |
 |
Text-only | Access advice | Disclaimer |
     |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A deadly dilemmaLast month, the biggest demonstration in British history marched through the streets of London. About a million people (according to the police) and up to two million (according to the organisers) poured into Hyde Park to oppose going to war with Iraq. Labour cabinet minister and leader of the House of Commons Robin Cook has resigned over the issue, and on 18 March, 217 MPs, including 139 Labour MPs, backed an amendment opposing the government's stance. However, the government's own motion authorising war was passed by a majority of 263, with 149 MPs voting against. The country as a whole is split. The latest polls are contradictory. A YouGov poll for ITV and the Daily Telegraph shows 50% support for the war, with 42% opposed and 8% undecided. But an ICM poll for the Guardian shows 51% against and 35% in favour. As this page was being prepared, our own special online poll showed that 55% of you believe that the case has NOT been made for war. On the eve of war, VEE-TV talked to a few of you in the studio. Creating hatred Bello Ahmed, a 25-year-old Muslim, e-mailed us to say he thinks Bush and Blair should not be going ahead without the agreement of the United Nations (UN). 'America and Britain have basically broken international law and the trust of the UN,' he says. 'They're setting a bad example to the rest of the world. 'The American government has to stop this foolishness in going to war and offending other countries. They create more hatred between the Eastern and Western worlds.' Fabrication Manoz Joshi, who is Hindu, e-mailed VEE-TV with an even more critical view of the coalition preparing for war. 'The USA and UK say that Saddam Hussein has chemical and biological weapons and is a major threat to our world,' he says. 'Then you wonder where these weapons came from and how the USA and UK know so much about it? The only solution that I can offer is that they has supplied him with those weapons in 1980 for Iraq's war with Iran! 'Furthermore, the USA and UK claim that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, which is completely fabricated. The only country that has used that kind of weapon is the USA, when they dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II. Are they a bunch of embarrassing idiots or what?' All about oil? Manoz calls the humanitarian motive for war – saving the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator – 'pure war propaganda' and says the real reason for invasion is that 'they want to control Iraq's oil reserves – the second largest in the world – in order to recover from their current recession. You may think, "Huh that's nonsense!", but ask yourself why they haven't gone to war in the last 12 years and why they are now.' However, the leaders of the US and the UK categorically deny that oil is a motive. Tony Blair recently promised that no one will touch Iraq's oil if Saddam goes. Civilian deaths Laura Dunkley, 23, is American and anti-war. She thinks that the 'war on terror' after 11 September will only lead to more deaths. 'I think it's sad about 11 September,' she says, 'but there are so many other people with lives. Bush should forget the war against terrorism and let it go so we can live our lives and not see dead bodies in the streets.' Sumita Paul, 23, who is Hindu, worries that war 'could go on and on for years, and lots of innocent people would be killed.' Forced to act? In the parliamentary debate on 18 March, Mr Blair told MPs that Saddam Hussein would be strengthened 'beyond measure' if he isn't forced to disarm. And when Mr Blair went to meet the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, earlier this year, he said 'I understand exactly why people feel so strongly, but in the end, I have got to make a decision and that's the difference between leadership and commentary.' Many of you agree that war is now necessary. Robert Pritchard, 34, told VEE-TV that he agrees Saddam must be stopped – even if it means war. 'People seem to have forgotten how Saddam Hussein tested chemicals on his own people, using them like guinea-pigs,' he says. 'Time to teach Saddam some lessons.' Lisa Vagnarelli, 21, also reluctantly believes war is now necessary. 'Obviously, many innocent people will be killed,' she says, 'even children who haven't seen life properly, which is really cruel. But, if we have to defend ourselves, that's how it has to be.' The desire to be free The people of Iraq are not allowed to say anything against Saddam, so it's difficult to ask them what they want. But there's general agreement that most would be glad to see him go. Dennis Dillon, 24, from Ireland, agrees with the humanitarian justification offered for war. 'Saddam Hussein is cruel man killing his own people,' he says. 'We have to stop him.' So, it seems that no one wants Saddam to stay, and no one wants innocent people to die. Adam Gibson, 24, a British Muslim, offers his solution: 'I think that a highly trained SAS sniper should find Saddam Hussein, shoot him and then go home.' What do YOU think about war on Iraq and the British role in it? Hit the FEEDBACK button and let us know. Find out moreBooks Dreaming War: Blood for oil and the Cheney-Bush junta by Gore
Vidal (Clairview Books, January 2003) £9.95 Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the new world order
by Robert Kagan (Atlantic Books, March 2003) £10 Saddam's Bombmaker: The inside story of Iraqi nuclear and biological
weapons agenda by Khidhir Hamza (Simon & Schuster, 2002) £10 The Threatening Storm: The case for invading Iraq by Kenneth
Pollack (Random House, February 2003) £18.99 War on Iraq by Scott Ritter and William Rivers Pitt (Profile
Books, 2002) £4.99 War Plan Iraq by Milan Rai (Verso Books, 2002) £10 Links Arab News Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Iraq Foreign and Commonwealth Office news The Muslim Association of Britain The Nuclear Posture Review – Reading between the lines President Bush's address to the US nation Stop the War Coalition The Independent: Robert Fisk on the motives for war United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection (UNMOVIC) Channel 4 Television takes no responsibility for the content of any third-party sites. |
|
