President Bush’s speech Monday night was a last-ditch effort to persuade the United Nations and the American public to support a war with Iraq.
In his speech, Bush warned the American public that Saddam Hussein might be plotting to attack the United States with biological and chemical weapons. He insisted the U.S. should attack Iraq alone if the United Nations refused support.
Tuesday, students and faculty offered their reactions to his speech.
“There is no way that we need to go into this war unilaterally,” said Greg Rubio, a graduate student in history. “With the information that has been presented, the only justification for unilateral action would be to determine a direct link between Iraq and Sept. 11.
“The vague rhetoric that Bush has offered so far does not establish that link.”
Many students said Bush usedscare tactics in his speech, like the threat of biological and chemical warfare, as a method of gaining support.
“His whole motivation for acting is fear,” said law professor Dr. Kenneth Holland. “The more afraid he makes us, the more supportive we will be.”
However LeKeisha Webb, a senior majoring in social work, said Bush’s statements about Americans having to “live in fear” did not impress her.
“I don’t feel like I’m living in fear,” Webb said. “I don’t think they’re a threat to us right now. I think Bush just wants to get over there.”
Dameon Banks shares Webb’s opinion that Bush is anxious to attack Iraq.
“I think there’s definitely a hidden agenda here,” Banks said. “We went from trying to catch a terrorist who we know attacked the World Trade Center to trying to catch someone we think might be linked to him.” Banks added that pursuing Hussein under the suspicion that he is linked to Osama bin Laden is risky because bin Laden has been linked to so many different people.
“We should fight one battle at a time,” Banks said. “In my eyes, there is no proof of Saddam’s involvement in the attack on the World Trade Center. We can’t just link him to Osama because we’ve had problems with him in the past.”
Holland shared similar views similar to those expressed by Banks.
“It was easy to justify going into Afghanistan because of Osama bin Laden,” he said. “It is very difficult for the president to justify going into Iraq because of a possible link between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.”
DeMarico Fowler, a senior majoring in political science and international studies, feels that more evidence is needed before a strike on Iraq can be justified.
“I think he used the bully pulpit of the office of president to try and gain support,” Fowler said. “He didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know about Hussein. If we had more evidence and we clearly knew Hussein was going to do something, then we would need to strike.”
