An 11 year war for bogus accusations

-Restorative justice could've saved thousands of U.S. troops and innocent Iraqi lives-

On March 20, 2003, The United States officially went to war with Iraq for three reasons, according to at the time president, George W. Bush: Saddam Hussein was a ruthless dictator, Iraq supposedly had weapons of mass destruction, and because Hussein allegedly supported terrorism with links to al Qaeda.

Bush’s arguments for the war on Iraq were not justified in my opinion.

The Middle Eastern country never presented an actual threat of danger to the United States. 

“..Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm. We agree that the Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons, and diseases, and gases, and atomic weapons.”
George W. Bush, October 7, 2002 

Hussein ruthlessly dictated Iraq as president for more than 30 years but never attempted to dictate America. Numerous dictators, such as al Qaeda aid Isaias Afewerki of Eritrea, are found throughout the world. It is not the United State’s moral responsibility to conquer such dictators and shape their societies into whichever way they please. The U.S. has done such in Iraq throughout 11 years of war, and history is repeating today with Afghanistan. With active U.S. military on base in different countries, America has become a dictator to less powerful regions including the Middle East. American troop’s killing sprees have killed thousands. It’s a bit hypocritical in my point of view.

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.”
George W. Bush, March 17, 2003

Twenty-six countries are suspected to occupy weapons of mass destruction of either nuclear, biological, or chemical composition. Does this mean America should go to war to obtain such weapons? Of course not. Why does America hold the power to decide which countries can possess weapons of mass destruction? Nations beside our own need forms of protection as well. Bush was persistent that Iraq held weapons of mass destruction but none were ever found. Apparently the CIA had misinformation. Figures.

"We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner. This network runs a poison and explosive training camp in northeast Iraq, and many of its leaders are known to be in Baghdad."    
George W. Bush, February 8, 2003

The U.S. Department of State recognizes 51 terrorist organizations. No evidence ever linked Hussein to al Qaeda. Though alleged at the time, Hussein was not associated with the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers or the Pentagon. Bush tried to justify the Iraq war with its al Qaeda connections even though the terrorist group is known to have cells worldwide. He stated later in September of 2003 that, “We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th."

Article Four, Section Four of the Constitution requires the U.S.’s protection of America against invasion. The horrific crimes of 9/11 needed not to go unpunished, however, retaliation was dealt with in the wrong way. Albert Einstein once said, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” You can’t solve terrorism with more terrorism.

America needs to stop taking actions that provoke terrorism. Rather than a widespread attack on Iraq; a country often forgotten by Americans to also inhabit faultless men, women, and children, the U.S. should of sought restorative justice from al Qaeda establisher, Osama bin Laden. 

LittleMissLibertarian
Miranda Pagan

Obama fails to deliver and Romney will probably never have the chance to… How about Gary Johnson?

When Mr. "Change" has broken almost all promises, and the other candidate is straight up Mr. Wishy-Washy, is third-party the way to vote?


Obama promised change when elected in 2008, and we’ve gotten some, but not necessarily the good kind. 

To kick off the Democratic National Convention last week, our national debt officially topped $16 trillion on the 4th. When running in 2008, Obama promised to cut the US’s national debt in half but rather has exceeded it by $5 trillion. 

We’ve had 42 consecutive months of unemployment over 8 percent since President Obama has taken office. College tuition has also increased 25 percent. What’s the point of going to college now that the chances of finding a job that will make enough to pay back student loans is slim?

Amendments five through eight remain broken by Obama’s decision to keep Guantanamo Bay open. Despite promises to shut down the detention camp, governments’ abuse of authority remains at Guantanamo and is exemplified by the unconstitutional, cruel and unusual torture of held suspected terrorists and their denial of a fair trial.

Do I even need to mention the war in Afghanistan that both Obama and Romney want to keep troops in until at least 2014? Our government needs to stop meddling in the affairs of other countries and stop dictating and controlling how they should be ran. It’s unnecessary, it’s expensive, it’s killing Americans as well as innocent victims, and it’s creating enemies when we could instead develop peace through free trade. Let’s focus on the re-growth of our own country rather then aiding others’ and let’s remove all troops from all 150 non-threat countries where stationed.

Obama promised not to harass medical marijuana providers in 2008 yet more than 60 federal indictments have resulted from raids on nearly 200 dispensaries and growers during his term. 

Though I can talk all day on the failed promises and negative impacts from Obama, I will give our current president props for one good thing that has come out of these last three and a half years with him in charge.

Obama has openly endorsed same-sex marriage and has fought hard for the equal rights of LGBT Americans and for that, I am appreciative. Some accomplishments on the issue include the repeal of the former “Don’t ask, don’t tell” military policy, the ban of discrimination in the workplace based on gender identity, and the extension of hospital visitation and decision making rights to same-sex couples. Though he hasn’t federally legalized gay marriage, Obama has left the issue up to the states.

However, the bad outweighs the good. 

Americans have allowed President Barack Obama almost four years to give our country the change it so much needs yet he has been unsuccessful for the most part.

But can the 2012 GOP nominee, Mitt Romney, fix the mess that Obama has bred? Probably not. 

Romney is an unstable vote and can’t be trusted. He has shifted his political stances on multiple occasions on issues including abortion, immigration, gun control, bailouts, and tax cuts. Like Obama, Romney has gone back on his word several times while being the former Governor of Massachusetts.

Massachusetts state spending increased 24 percent in three years under Romney and $500 million in fees were raised in 2003 despite his promise not to raise taxes. Yet Romney has promised that if elected the next president, he would cut tax rates 20 percent lower than Bush did. It’s hard to trust such a statement from Romney when you take into account his record.

Romney’s campaign hasn’t been focused at all enough on the real issues of America but rather on the fact that he is not Obama. 

Obama’s campaign hasn’t been too great either. He too has ignored focus on crucial issues and has shifted almost all of attention on women’s rights--specifically abortion, LGBT equality, and healthcare. Though they are important issues to be discussed, they should not be the only. 

Both Obama and Romney failed to specifically address- and did great jobs avoiding- some of America’s pressing issues such as financial reform and the national debt, immigration, “Romneycare,” social security, and the war with Afghanistan. 

The race is close with Obama at 49 percent and Romney at 48. We all know that America is run by a two-party political system, but what do we do when the republican and democrat nominees are both complete messes? 

Guilt would eat me away if I voted for either one of the two head candidates running in the 2012 election. Since Ron Paul is no longer in the race, I have decided to vote for third-party Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson on November 6th 2012.  

I agree with Johnson on most issues and although voting for him will not do much, I refuse to vote for Romney and I refuse to vote for Obama. 

Johnson is the only candidate who will immediately bring troops home from Afghanistan, cut military spending by 43 percent, veto all bailouts, work to legalize marijuana, submit a balanced budget by 2013, repeal the Patriot Act, audit the Federal Reserve, end the Department of Education, simplify and promote immigration, keep the internet free and safe, and to take the government completely out of the bedroom by striving to legalize gay marriage.

LittleMissLibertarian
Miranda Pagan