This was a letter I wrote to the Editor of the Boston Globe in the couple weeks leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Needless to say, they didn't print it.
But if I may say so, I thought it captured the essence of the liberal stance on the War on Terror, particularly the last two paragraphs:
To the Editor of The Boston Globe:
During the last weekend, hundreds of thousands of people around the world took to the streets in demonstration against a prospective US military action against the current Iraqi regime. This is a seeming indication of solidarity against war, and one must wonder if there are any voices out there advocating military action. If so, they are not seen on the streets, carrying signs and shouting slogans. But I know that there are voices out there advocating military action, because I am one of them. And there are others like me, many others. Why are we not on the street demonstrating for war?
The fact is; nobody really wants war. That is why my voice and others like it do not echo in the street. How could anyone in their right mind go out in the street shouting “Bomb Iraq Now”, carrying signs and linking arms as they walk down the street? How can anyone be ‘for’ an action that will probably result in young Americans being killed and maimed in battle, not to mention death and destruction to innocent Iraqis and the Iraqi servicemen who serve against their will? How can we pump our fists in the air, grin, and say: “Let’s Roll”? The truth is: we can’t.
Those of us who have thought this through, and would approve of military action against Iraq, do so with a heavy heart. We agree to shoulder the quiet, grim, unpalatable burden of understanding the consequences of such an action. If there is death and devastation, we know we must carry the moral responsibility for the outcome. We accept the risk that our calculus is wrong, and that our hearts and hands will be stained with the blood of those who may suffer wrongly as a result. Nevertheless, we are willing to accept this burden; and this is why:
In the 1930’s, the world watched and debated as Nazi Germany rose to power. As Germany planned, plotted and executed each step in their march to domination of Europe, the rest of the world watched, debated, wrung their hands, and proffered diplomacy as a solution. Nazi Germany lied, and the rest of us were relieved to accept the lies. France and England, who had lost an entire generation in the First World War, were determined to avoid war at all costs. In those countries, many believed that there was nothing worth going to war over. It would be Peace at all Costs. As we found out millions of lost and shattered lives later, Germany had no intention of living in Peace, no matter how good intentioned the diplomacy was, and it ended up Costing the rest of the world a great deal. Appeasement and words will not deter aggression from those to whom appeasement is weakness, and words are tools to further their ends. This, history has taught us.
Now, we have come full circle. As it was with Adolf Hitler, the world is again faced with a dictator who believes that the weakness of his enemies is the public opinion of their own people, and that any diplomatic efforts are merely words to be turned to his own use. But there is a difference. This regime has weapons that have the capability to kill untold numbers in a variety of horrible ways, while leaving very little evidence pointing to the source. Iraq has used these same weapons in a political fashion to murder their own citizens in an attempt to control them, as well as tactically against a neighboring country in a war of aggression. Iraq has shown no restraint in employing these weapons. Use of these weapons against people in other countries, including the United States, is only as far away as a truck ride across the Iraqi border.
We must not repeat the mistakes of the 1930’s. We now know that there are things worth fighting for. Our safety, and the safety of others around the world is one of those things. So, those of us who feel that war is appropriate, accept the moral burden with eyes wide open. Likewise, those who oppose war should do the same. In the event of another large scale attack by a terrorist group with weapons supplied by Iraq, will those who now oppose action against Iraq bear the moral responsibility, or will they lift their voices above all others in a demand for the scalps of those in our government who did not act?
After World War II, there were few people to be found who admitted to supporting appeasement; those who did admit it mostly regretted it, and lived the rest of their lives in shame. But all of those people, whether they admitted it or not, bore the stains on their hands of the millions who died due to the failure of the rest of the world to take a stand when it still mattered. Right now, we can still take a stand and make a difference. Right now, what we do still matters. If we shirk our responsibility, if we fail to stand up and be counted while we have the chance, are we prepared to share the fate of those who appeased Nazi Germany? It is well to heed the lessons of history.
Nice letter.