Return to AE Contents

Classroom on the Quad
Welcome and Introductions
Bruce Knauft, Faculty Council

Jim Grimsley, Faculty Council

Purvi Patel, College Council

Donna Wong, Campus Life

Iraq: The Challenge of Responsibility
Rick Doner, Political Science

Weapons of Mass Destruction and U.S. Foreign Policy
Dan Reiter, Political Science

A Call to Words
Asanka Pathiraja, Foreign Policy Exchange

Hearing in Eqanimity: Deciding Your Path
Bobbi Patterson, Religion

The Necessity of War with Iraq
Bob Bartlett, Political Science

The Humanitarian Cost of War
Laurie Patton, Religion

A Man of Honor: The President's Noble Vision
Daniel Hauck, College Republicans

Women: War and Peace
Lili Baxter, Women's Studies

The Morality of War
James Tarter, Students for War Against Terrorism

Speak Up or Get Out
Erin Harte, Young Democrats

War Does Not Resolve Conflict, War Is Conflict
Mark Goodale, Anthropology

A War of Liberation
Frank Lechner, Sociology

A Call to Consciousness, A Litany of Questions
Juana Clem McGhee, Institute for Comparative and International Studies

Student Activism: Ways to Be Involved
Erik Fyfe and Rachael Spiewak, Emory Peace Coalition

Cross-Cultural Communication: U.S. and Iraq
Devin Stewart, Middle Eastern and South Asian Studies

The U.S. Has Never Been Alone in the World
William Chace, University President

Good afternoon. As a representative of Students for the War Against Terrorism, I would like to begin by saying that war is an evil thing and should never be the desired objective of policymaking. However, war is not the worst of things. The unfortunate reality is that sometimes, war is the only way to achieve a goal, such as freeing an oppressed people, and that outweighs the costs of fighting the war.

The case for war against Iraq is very simple. Number one: Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. Even today, this is being confirmed. As CNN, NBC, CBS, and FOX news have all reported, the Iraqis are threatening to use chemical weapons when allied forces breach the Baghdad perimeter. These are the same weapons which two weeks ago they swore to the U.N. Security Council they didn’t have. Number two: Saddam’s regime violates nearly every known international human rights standard. Number three: Saddam has given refuge to various terrorists military commanders, and has shown himself to be supportive of al Queda. And number four: the International Community has given its consent to military action, through seventeen U.N. resolutions, as well as the support of over forty countries in the current military campaign. All in all, Hussein’s draconian regime must go. Due to time constraints, in this speech I will concentrate on the human rights justification for war.

In some foreign policy circumstances, war is the moral action. Without war, we would not have been able to create this great nation in which we live. Without war, we would not have been able to stop slavery. Without war, we would not have been able to stop the development of fascism and communism. Without war, we would not have been able to stop the mass genocides of millions under the Nazi regime. Without war, we would have been unable to turn back the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Without war, we would have been unable to stop the ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia. Notice a pattern? It is through the moral application of war that we have been able to move the world out of barbarianism and into civility, creating respect for individual liberties, human rights, and democracy. As the cliché goes, freedom is not free. The myopic viewpoint that war is always bad is empirically denied.

Even with other major world powers opposing us, the United States should be lauded for being willing to take on the burden of war in Iraq. The United States is one of the few countries in the world that is moral enough to stand up for what we believe in. While we certainly see the advantages of participating and contributing to international debate, multilateral treaties, and foreign consultation, the American spirit is one of unique determination. We don’t just talk the talk, we walk the walk. Where France and Russia may condemn the human rights atrocities under Saddam’s regime, at the next moment they give Mr. Hussein a ring to see how the new French and Russian equipment is working. Not in America. We have our beliefs and we will stand up for them and the right for others to share those beliefs. Just because Hussein only kills his own people doesn’t mean it’s not our problem. The goal of this war being morality, the United States should be applauded for stepping up to its obligation when the International Community has failed to meet its own. Standing up for your beliefs—being willing to put your money where you mouth is—this is where true morality can be found. We have tried challenging Saddam through diplomacy—we tried for twelve years. The only effective mechanism by which Saddam can be both disarmed and the human rights of the Iraqi people preserved is through the removal of Hussein, through force if necessary.

In conclusion, I’ll say again that war is not a “good” option. But there some evils that are worse than war. Genocides, concentration camps, torture chambers, rape camps—these should be challenged, by force if diplomacy fails. We should be applauding the U.S. for its tenacity to use more than rhetoric to enforce its beliefs. Sometimes, if you want something done right, you’ve got to do it yourself. The American courage in backing up what it says to defend the rights of an oppressed people should be applauded at every instance. This is truly a moral war, a war which will improve the world in which we live. Thank you for your time, and God Bless America.