Hi 87 / Lo 67
|Volume 68, Issue 25,
Monday, September 30, 2002
United Nations uses double standards
The reason for attacking Iraq and deposing of Saddam Hussein in a "regime change" is for the sake of peace, as President Bush so clearly stated, "We want peace" — "we" meaning citizens of nations Bush deems worthy.
Who could deny our desire for peace? All we want, of course, is to foster love and make the world one big fat, happy family.
During our conquest for peace, however, the United States gives the Zionist regime of Israel $5 billion a year to disturb the peace of Palestinians and repeatedly violate U.N. resolutions. When the United States bombs Iraq to enforce "no fly zones" we are — of course — only peacefully announcing our presence.
Now the United States wants a bigger war with Iraq for its violations of U.N. resolutions. Looks like a case of playing favorites in the shadow of double standards.
Right next door to the "unruly" nation of Iraq, is Israel — currently boasting a violation of at least 29 U.N. resolutions. By comparison, Iraq has breached 16.
People are growing more and more aware of this disparity of tolerance the United States has for different countries that literally lie side by side.
Yahya Mahmassani, permanent U.N. observer for the League of Arab States, vents this frustration: "Why should Israel be above the law? Because some members of the Security Council — or one member, maybe — is all the time protecting Israel. There should not be double standards."
Why is the United States targeting only one country for its violations and its supposed possession of weapons of mass destruction?
If we are to look at the issue this way, Israel also fits the bill, except for the fact that it is internationally known that Israel possesses weapons of mass destruction. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that resists signing the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
Somehow the American government finds it convenient to ignore the reports by Scott Ritter, former U.N. weapons inspector and Dennis Halliday, former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, who have said time and time again that there is no evidence Iraq possesses such weapons.
But Iraq and Israel are not the only example of this disparity. Had Russia and China been smaller, weaker nations, they would have faced harsh Council condemnation concerning their actions in Chechnya and Tibet, say U.N. observers.
Many of us are tired of hearing, "Youire either with us or against us." Bush has even gone so far to give the United Nations an ultimatum, claiming their irrelevance if they decide against the United States.
Apparently, the Bush administration has turned deaf ears to the worldwide community, who so far has publicly made clear that they will not support the United States on their "goodwill" campaign against Iraq. While the United States is running around destroying the peace of other nations, they expect the citizens of these countries to just smile and nod.
World anti-war demonstrators are coming out in thousands. The United States is no exception. Signs in hand, Americans are pleading for peace and an end to ridiculous pre-emptive strikes that will supposedly sprout tranquility.
How much is enough? How much will innocents have to suffer at the hands of greedy, selfish, patriotic pinheads? Will the real perpetrators stop hiding in their bunkers and please stand up?
If anything, we should be afraid of the people who wear the mask of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness — while they destroy these God-given rights to others. The pre-emptive war against Iraq is not only unconstitutional but also in violation of international law.
Zaidi, a senior communications major,
To contact the
To contact other members