Student essays: Teens share feelings about potential war with Iraq
"I teach, allowing students to voice their opinions, because without taking the risks of putting what they think out there, they’ll never know or understand what it is they believe in," Conner says. "We study history, read literature based on the assumption that some ideas are timeless. The only way to prove that statement is to allow students the freedom to take what they know for themselves and apply it to the ‘Iliad,’ ‘The Bluest Eye’ or ‘Baron in the Trees.’
"If we, as teachers, allow students to walk into the world believing there is one way to look at a novel, one way to look at history, we are telling them there is only one way to look at the world. As adults we know that statement to be false. How do students learn, if not from us?"
Conner agreed to ask her students to write short essays about their feelings of the prospect of war with Iraq.
Do we even have a say?
Going to war is a chilling thought, yet our own president is implementing it. Do we as citizens of the United States even have a say in what is decided by our government? It's more like we're here to watch it all go wrong. Are we willing to put our lives and our way of life at risk? Either way, going to war will cause problems for people, whether it is people in the U.S. or people in Iraq.
My father had gone through the deprivation of war in the early years of his life. Life was almost impossible for him to endure. No food, no clothes, no heat, and no money. It was because of a war that he had to struggle.
War should be a last resort if all else fails. There are many other paths that could be taken, but the U.S. seems to be taking the path of war. Peace would protect more people from the problems caused by war and protect their way of life. There would be no need for war, no need for bombs. There wouldn't be children trying to survive by supporting their entire family as my father had to.
As all Miss Americas say: "World peace."
— Alexis Panteleakos
Need to show we're serious
People ask me what I think about the war. I say to them that I think that we need to show Saddam Hussein that we are serious. I do not think he should have weapons of mass destruction. I do not think that we should go to war, for it could have horrible effects on the surrounding counties and the U.S. There has to be a better way.
If we go to war, Saddam might sell all of his weapons of mass destruction on the black market and then we will not know how many other countries that hate us have these weapons. This will affect all of us in some way; either we will have to clean up their mess or there will be World War III. If this happens we could lose millions of people.
— Catherine Wyckoff
War is a big deal
In examining the prospects of war with Iraq, I am bewildered, wondering why I am the only one with only one question. Everywhere around me, people are asking everything. They want to know all the details. I, however, want to know one thing: How can we even consider going to war, when there are so many people who cannot fathom that it could be a good idea?
We cannot treat war as if it is just a decision we have to make. No: War is a big deal. I want to put that on posters. Forget trying to make people take a side — the first priority is to get people to understand how incomprehensibly huge war is. Millions have been killed in previous wars. That is an insane amount of people. To me, a million deaths is not even a tangible thing.
So when I ask how we can consider going to war when there are so many people who are against it, I am really asking why people don't realize that the question should be asked. War is such a big thing that you can't be "kind of sure" in order to go through with it. You need to know, with a passion, that the only way to solve the problem at hand is by going to war. If we're really going to do this, we have to be 100 percent positive.
— Laurel Stewart
Our problems are solved!
Well, personally I think that a war in Iraq would be great! I mean, there are so many good reasons why we should invade, I don't see why we haven't already! For one, we wouldn't be threatened with atomic bombs by anyone because it is a well-known fact that our only enemy with nuclear weapons is Iraq. So if we blow Iraq off the face of the earth, our problems are solved!
Also, we could get Iraqi oil if we invade. We need oil to fuel all of our vehicles. Heck, we could send tanks — running on Iraqi oil — in there to blow them all up if they don't agree to give us more! That would be totally badass.
Oh, and if we invade Iraq for our own economic purposes, then it would be cool because it would say that we are the best country in the world because we have the strength to do what we want!
But when we go to war with Iraq, we should do it without consent from the U.N. Then we could really show that we are hard-core and nothing stops us — not our allies, not signed peace agreements, and not even international coalitions.
We can be all alone — and still kick butt! Yeehaw!
— Neal Marks
Flexing our muscles
When faced with the question "Should America go to war with Iraq?" there is no simple answer. Many people are quick to say "NO IRAQ WAR!" and sympathetically patronize the Iraqi and other Islamic people, saying, "Oh, the hardships they must go through, no wonder they are angered with our powerful nation."
But America is not going to war with the Iraqi nor Islamic people, but rather the Iraqi government and Islamic extremist groups. In Iraq, we see a corrupt government who cares nothing for their people, and has made direct threats against the U.S. In al-Qaida there is no sympathy or understanding for the American people, only deep-seeded hatred fueled by impoverished conditions.
If Americans look to Sept. 11, we all feel sorrow, pain, sympathy for the families who have lost so much. While a war in Iraq would not be directly retaliating against al-Qaida, the premise of the war would be eradicating weapons of mass destruction. After the war, America would have taken a step toward ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction, and we will have hopefully "flexed our muscles" enough to keep terrorists at bay for a while.
So should we go to war? I don't know, but I think we have a lot of valid reasons to do so, but whether or not those reasons are valid enough to waste innocent lives is a question I can't answer.
— Lauren Orvis
To every solution, a problem
I feel war would be a very big mistake, but what is America supposed to do?
The biggest goal for people worldwide is to achieve world peace. On the other hand, if America does not protect itself against terrorism, then that sends a bad message to the rest of the world: that we would just sit back and take whatever attacks other countries throw at us. This is not the kind of message we as Americans would like to send.
Saddam Hussein has created a very difficult situation for not only America, but the whole world. I cannot decide whether this war would be better for people everywhere, or create more problems. If there was a peaceful solution that made everybody happy, I am sure that President Bush would not hesitate to do it, but I have thought about it many times, as I assume most people have, and to every solution I have thought of, there is a problem.
— Erin Wright
Forcing Iraq to give up its oil
War is an unnecessary struggle for power and an easy way to lose the lives of loved ones. The United States wants to assert its power, and I believe one of the main factors of this fight is oil. President George W. Bush is using the U.S. as an imperialist nation and trying to force Iraq to give up its oil and suspected nuclear capabilities.
I do not agree with Saddam Hussein or his government, but I think that it would be in his best interests to allow U.N. inspectors in Iraq to verify his claims of not having weapons of mass destruction. If he is telling the truth, the prospect of war with Iraq could be suspended for the time being.
If the U.S. were to succeed in removing Hussein from power, Iraq would face massive amounts of political unrest that could end up being hazardous for a lot of nations.
— Matt Higgins
What are the president's motives?
The war on Iraq is not only unneeded, but it is unclear as well. Saddam Hussein has killed thousands of his own people and does not comply with the United Nations. While he is doing terrible things constantly in his own country, it is not the United States' job to be the world's policeman. In Hussein's refusal to go along with the U.N., he is picking a fight with the countries of the world, not only the U.S.
What, then, are the president's motives for the war? Maybe he wants someone to blame for the events of Sept. 11; maybe he feels like he can't back down after he stated his desire for war. The president could just want the oil that Iraq possesses. None of these reasons will justify the devastating loss of American and Iraqi lives the war will bring.
Even if we do go to war, what would happen afterward? Iraq would be demolished, and our country would have to go back and rebuild. The United States would impose democracy on the new Iraq as well. However, that would only spark more controversy, seeing as the countries surrounding Iraq are all monarchies. Iraq would still be in a state of complete chaos, even after so many lives were sacrificed.
— Mackenzie Lawrence
A chance for a better world
I don't like the idea of going to war with anyone, no matter who they are. It makes me feel that where I am living is unsafe, makes me feel that the future isn't going to be like how I thought it was going to be when I was a little girl. I would always sit in my social studies classes learning about wars; I heard all the horrible stories about thousands killed and injured. Why would we ever want to go through that again? Why would we want to repeat history when for so long we tried to find peace with everyone.
For most people, I think, the war on Iraq is about revenge. Everyone is still so hurt and angered by Sept. 11 that they want to see the people who did it to them suffer. It is stupid that since we can't find Osama bin Laden we are acting against the Iraqi people. Who says all the Iraqi people wanted the attack on the United States?
I just don't see why so many people want so much pain. Everyone talks about how they want this world to be better; well, here is a chance to make it happen.
— Alexandra Roocroft
We have many weapons of mass destruction
President Bush has both public and personal reasons for such a war, none of which are justified. He says Iraq possesses nuclear and biological weaponry when Saddam denies this and Hans Blix's team disproved this. Even if Saddam had nuclear weapons, he does not have devices to send them to the United States. Bush wants to go to war with Iraq to wipe out weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. But we in the United States have many weapons of mass destruction far more powerful and lethal than most any other countries have, such as the Trident II or D 5 ballistic missiles carried aboard nuclear-powered submarines like the Nevada based here in Bangor, Wash.
There also are terrorists in the U.S. and around the world. They are no longer affiliated with just one country. President Bush has not proven that there is any connection between Iraq and al-Qaida. There is no way of knowing if there are terrorists in Iraq. Personally Bush thinks Saddam tried to kill his father during the Gulf War. This personal reason is not in the interests of the American people.
— Alex Leavitt
If the U.N. were to aid us
The American government believes that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction; however, so far in the U.N.'s searches nothing has come up to prove that. I believe that George Bush's reasoning for this war is off kilter; I think that it is mainly a way to right the mistakes his father made during his period in office.
One of the main reasons I am against the possible war in Iraq is because the United States does not have backing from a lot of our allies. If the U.N. were to aid us and agree with the U.S., then I would be more inclined to support an attack. As of now, however, that has not happened, and the United States has no real right to bomb anywhere in the Middle East.
I really don't think that the U.S. has any right to take control over a situation like this; the only way I would consider agreeing with this war is if we had U.N. backing.
— Andrew Carlin
What makes Iraq more of a danger now?
It is completely logical that the possibility of war instigates an anxious environment, but with the lack of support from any other political or economic superpowers, the United States is in a tough spot.
In my eyes, the issue is not whether a war is justified, because I believe there is certainly information that has not been made known to the general public. What I do feel I know, however, is that President Bush has put the U.S. in a bad position, by coming across to the U.N. and to the citizens of many other countries as cowboy-like.
If Iraq poses a threat to the world, then why is it that hardly any other countries are as aggressive as we are? Or the more curious question: What makes Iraq more of a danger now than they were during the Clinton administration? With the alleged links with al-Qaida weak at best, only two possible motivations come to mind. One, that President Bush feels it is somehow his duty as a son to avenge the attempted Iraqi assassination on his father, or, two, he is simply keeping the conflict with Iraq in the public eye to shift view away from a failing economy.
Could it be that the government, who has not yet been able to find bin Laden, felt that to feel and appear successful, they should attack what has been the military scapegoat for the past decade and a half?
— David Lipson
Necessary in some instances
I think that there should be no war. Although I do believe that war is necessary in some instances for protection, I am against striking out at whole countries. In the war against Saddam Hussein, it's my understanding that it is a little bit of both, but leaning more toward the U.S. trying to protect itself.
— Thaddeus Turner
The U.S. used to fight for freedom and justice
After Sept. 11 all our views on the world changed. We no longer lived in the hunky-dory world we had created in our own minds and now had to face the real world. Immediately after Sept. 11 the United States embarked on a crusade to rid the world of terror and the various groups that support it.
The United States is now accusing Iraq of having biological, nuclear and chemical weapons and is further accusing them of supporting terrorist groups throughout the Middle East. The United States makes this claim without any valid proof, unless you believe "evidence" submitted by Colin Powell.
The United States is using our fears of another terrorist attack to justify a war. There are two reasons for this war: The first is that we are going to war with Iraq because they are an opponent we can beat, unlike the more dangerous North Korea. The second is probably worse and that is for oil and capital gain.
Although I support the administration on most issues, going to war over oil and capital is not moral. The United States used to fight for freedom and justice, but now we are going to war over oil and money. Sacrificing Iraqi and American lives over oil and money does not justify a war.
— Ian Griswold
Save lives, resources, money and time
A war against Iraq is not what anyone wants right now — especially not me. Rather than sending out more soldiers, we should send out more investigators and more army intelligence. Since we have the technology to take satellite photos, we should use that to disarm Iraq before any more terrorist attacks occur. I think that we should save the lives, resources, money and time by sending inspectors and using satellite photos over Iraq to determine more about their weapons and plans. This way may be more successful than sending 150,000 young boys and threatening Iraq, which could provoke a war even more.
Since I am only 15 years old, I cannot even begin to fathom what shape the world forms once a war is declared. I think it's terrifying. I think President Bush is not being smart by trying to live up to his dad's claim to fame, and is getting caught up in the power he has over the United States. So I think that we should send more inspection teams and force the use of satellite photography over Iraq.
— Molly Dow
Iraqi citizens have been silenced by this dictator
I think that the war against Iraq is just a way for the United States to retain world domination. The United States tries to control other countries with import laws and infiltration of their economies with American products. Less technologically advanced countries can not participate as successfully in the world economy with the barriers created by the U.S. government. The fact that we are a large, wealthy and technologically advanced country does not give us the right to bully and push around other countries.
Why did Osama bin Laden attack the U.S.? The answer is because the United States is the most powerful country of our time and bin Laden and his followers believed our culture was trying to destroy theirs. To date, we have been unable to find this man who committed such a horrible act of violence on Sept.11.
Without bin Laden as a target for our anger, we turn to Saddam Hussein. The majority of Iraqi citizens have been silenced by this brutal dictator. We can't stand the fact that a smaller, less powerful group could harm the United States so deeply. Our present leadership is creating a belief that we must kill anyone who crosses our path.
— Katie Armstrong
I would be lost
I do not know what I think about the war. But I know I do not like the fact that we are thinking about it, because war is a horrible thing. The truth is, I do not know the whole situation. It is too complex to figure out how we got to the point of war in the first place. While I know that someone might be able to tell me exactly how the United States got into this situation, I would be lost by the time someone finished their explanation to me.
War is ugly. I know that on earth there will never be a utopian life for anyone. Anyone can keep hoping, wishing, or even praying for the world to be perfect. But perfect is never what it seems and not what we really want. Nothing is exciting that way. What we need on this earth is peace. War will not bring peace.
I think a lot about the war. However, my thinking is unclear and jumbled. The one thing I do know is war is a horrifying event that the world should not have to go through ever again. Please help us not go to war.
— Amy Denton
Hearsay and conjecture
Power: Throughout history, man has been driven by both its source and actuality. Why should today be any different? The actions the U.S. government is taking are quite deplorable. I am perfectly willing to accept the notion of going to war because of disagreements, or control of the world's oil supply. I mean, let's face the facts: There are definitely some people that I would rather not be dependent upon, and Saddam Hussein is one of them (our current president being an unfortunate other).
But lying and falsifying evidence that was not even remotely convincing was a step far beneath that of any government. Congratulations to our formidable think tank, for the best they could come up with was hearsay and conjecture — two things that any judge would throw out of a regular courtroom.
Whatever the outcome, whatever the decision, just remember that it is the people of Iraq that will suffer. Is one man worth all that?
— Zoé Burstyn
Our voices should be heard
I think that a war with Iraq is not justified because the president does not have the support of the U.N. or many U.S. citizens. The president has asked America to believe him when he says that Saddam Hussein has nuclear or biological weapons, without giving us any information.
At the same time President Bush wants to go to war with Iraq, he also taking about the weapons issues with North Korea and Afghanistan. I do not think we should go to war with Iraq when it does not seem that we have thought of other solutions, and American citizens do not know the facts or have a say in the decision.
As a teenager I do not have the right yet to vote, but I think if we feel so strongly about some of these issues, our voices should be heard.
— Marissa Joy-Kurtz
Prance around on his white horse
I feel that the war on Iraq is unjustified and it is just another excuse for George W. Bush to prance around on his white horse. Although the Iraqi government has issues with how it governs, and how it presents itself, the Iraqis are years behind us in technology. Do you think they want to go to war with us, when most of them barely have clean water and are living in stone houses? No.
I think that because the U.N. as a whole is not sticking by America when we speak of a war, other countries are seeing that this truly has no purpose. Also, America consumes and uses the most resources and we have the most disposable income. If America goes to war everyone will suffer, because without our consumption, it will affect everyone.
— Emily Autry-Schiffgens
U.S. has responsibility to the world
War, military aggression, or the prospect of such a situation is disturbing to me, especially as a high school sophomore. Being young enough to not remember the last Gulf War, but approaching the age that I could become a participant in war, exacerbates my fear of the possibility of armed conflict in Iraq.
While I believe that things must be done on the part of the United States to right certain wrongs within the world, I do not feel that a war with Iraq will significantly better this international malady. In fact, a second war in Iraq could very well trigger a second major terrorist strike within the United States. This is a tragedy no one wants to see.
While United Nations inspection is a slow and painful process, it should be carried out to its fullest, as it is the best alternative we have at this moment. War should be avoided at all costs.
The United States has a responsibility to remedy certain problems in the world; however, it is also its responsibility to guard the lives of civilians or combatants that might be caught up in a future war. It is in the best interest of our country to avoid war with Iraq.
— Stefan Vraspir
Rid the world of Saddam HusseinWar in Iraq could prove to be a great action for the world, and moreover, the United States. There is also a chance that many innocent civilians will die. To prevent such an unfortunate circumstance, the U.S. needs to send a small strike force and take out Saddam Hussein and other prominent Baath Party leaders. From looking back at history, the obvious seeps forth: Saddam is a megalomaniacal madman. He killed nearly 30,000 of his own people, the Kurds, in 1982. He killed even more after the Gulf War. Saddam, being part of the Baath Party in Iraq, has an overall goal of uniting the Arab world into one society. Such an act goes against the very core values our country is built on. If Saddam has nuclear weapons, and we do not attack him, what happens if we get "nuked" next year and 50,000 people are killed?
Before jumping to the view of "No Iraq war" one must consider what the alternative will be. Obviously, the U.S. will not be able to negotiate with such a crazy power-hungry monster. After the shuttle Columbia crashed in Texas, Saddam sent a message to President Bush telling him the crash was the will of Allah, because the United States is "a country of infidels." Such a note gives off a connotation that one cannot negotiate with Saddam. The United States needs to rid the world of Saddam Hussein, along with his accomplices, before the inevitable occurs.
— Matt Riser