Posted on 03/18/2003 1:05:15 PM PST by deisjaws
Brandeis divided over impending war against Iraq By Benjamin Freed
With President Bush's speech last night signaling imminent conflict with Iraq, opinions on the war have divided the Brandeis community. "I still feel like the president hasn't shown us any reason why we should go to war. He hasn't shown us any of these links, he just keeps saying it," said Steven Laferriere '04, a moderator of the Anti-War Coalition's mailing list. In recent months, the Coalition has been making announcements about its planned walkout should the United States attack Iraq. With the prospect of war increasing this week, Laferriere is focused on a walkout as the Brandeis anti-war movement's cornerstone event. "We're planning on having the walkout the day after the war starts. In the future there may be other events, but right now we're mostly focused on the walkout," he said.
Protest in the face of military conflict is nothing strange to Brandeis, a campus that saw a great amount of dissent during the 1960's and 1970's, during the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement. Safety will be an issue during any protests or rallies, and the Department of Public Safety says it is prepared to handle tasks that come with dissent. "We as a department of public safety try to give people as much leeway as possible," Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan said, assuring students there will be minimal public safety interference. "Obviously, we will not interfere as long as people are peaceful and not destructive," he added. Callahan also commented on the importance of dissent at a campus, saying, "It's the mission of an academic institution, as long as no one's rights are violated."
The anti-war movement draws support from faculty as well as students. Prof. Gordon Fellman (SOC) spoke passionately against the war in Iraq and the 'War on Terrorism' on the whole. "This war has been planned since before Bush became president. It sets a horribly dangerous example of preemptive war. It is consistent with Bush's violation of all international treaties, and there is no link (between Hussein and al Qaeda)," Fellman said in a phone interview. "I consider war the way of the weak. Making war is for the imagination challenged, it only reasserts masculinity," he added.
Professor Jacob Cohen (AMST) offers a much different perspective on the war. "I am in support of the president's position," he said. However, Cohen left the door open to the possibility of a solution not requiring an invasion by the U.S. military, saying he thinks that "It is possible that Saddam will leave the country or be assassinated, which will allow that the U.S. can enter peacefully."
Professor Stephen Whitfield (AMST) is also in favor of military action. "I'm strongly in favor despite concern that wars can go badly," he said. Even with this reservation, Whitfield depicted this conflict as a choice between "an exceptionally cruel and brutal despot who has killed his own people and devastated his country on the one hand, and on the other the prospect of a quick and decisive American victory by the application of overwhelming military force as in Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan."
Although the anti-war movement has consistently gathered more steam over the past few months, there exists a vocal pro-war contingent of the student body. United We Stand, a new club that describes itself as "an outlet for Brandeis students to express their support for America," plans to counter the actions of the Anti-War Coalition with events of its own. "United We Stand encourages everyone to go to class, even if their professor is not there," said club president Mira Meyerovich '03. "Also, we are asking people to wear yellow ribbons or red, white and blue ribbons as a sign of support for our country, our troops and victory in Iraq. We will be handing out free ribbons for people to wear," she said.
United We Stand also issued a campus-wide e-mail last night to announce their "Support America Campaign." Club Secretary and Public Relations Officer Joshua Wiznitzer '03 authored the message, repeating the ideas initially voiced by Meyerovich. He also divulged his personal views. "I have long supported President Bush and I believe that his comments earlier this evening were right on target. He did an excellent job laying out the case against Saddam," Wiznitzer said late Monday evening.
Not every student approved of Monday's presidential address. People like Laferriere remain unconvinced about many of the president's arguments. "I still think there's no clear reason. The speech was forceful and the ultimatum was a good idea, but he certainly hasn't convinced me," Laferriere said. Fellman said he believes the president's motives in war are unfounded and perhaps even hypocritical. "There is no link. For Bush to claim that Saddam is evil for ignoring the United Nations, if he were more self-conscious, he would be talking about himself," Fellman said.
North Quad Senator Daniel Mauer '06, who has been a leading student voice in the anti-war lobby, most visibly with his proposed referendum to officially state that the undergraduate student body is opposed to the impending war, was surprised by Monday's events. "When I found out a lot of Bush's plan had changed, I was absolutely stunned," Mauer said. He also hopes, though doubts, that Hussein will comply with the ultimatum to avoid the costs of war. "I'm hoping for the best, which I see as Saddam leaving voluntarily because there are horrendous aspects of war that are very real and we don't want them to take place," he added. Despite yesterday's developments, Mauer said his referendum is now in consideration before the Union Senate.
Although Saddam Hussein has been offered the opportunity to peacefully step down from power, both sides of the war argument at Brandeis appear ready for war to occur. "War is about people being killed. If it's about terrorism and terrorism is the killing of innocent civilians, then the United States is also a terrorist," Fellman said. Cohen said he believes "Saddam's defeat is absolutely certain." The coming days will finalize the decision of war in Iraq, and then only time can tell which view on the conflict will prevail.
Brilliant. By enforcing a UN Resolution, Bush is evil. Bush should stop ignoring the UN like that, er ... I mean ....
And what's this hogwash about a link? Hussein runs a terror state. He tortures people. He uses poison gas on his own citizens and people in other countries. He's responsible for the 1991 oil well fires and oil dumping. He's invaded two soverign nations. In 1991 the UN declared him to be in possession of anthrax and illegal chemicals. He sent scuds against Israel in 1991 for no good reason. Hussein harbors terrorists like Abu Nidal and sends money to the families of Palestinian suicide-bombers.
The guy's a freakin' terrorist! What kind of evidence would convince these losers? Somehow they think it's all about 9-11. That's the catylyst for the war, but the war against terrorists does not stop with Osama bin Laden and his immediate inner circle.
Sorry, I'm not willing to take it that far. There will always be a core of morons, and I would rather deal with their idiocy than restrict their right to be idiots...
The country is at war. So is everyone inside the country. If someone wants to make up a sign and stand on a streetcorner, that's their right. However, if they interfere with traffic they have slipped into the category of violent demonstration. This war was brought upon the country and nothing will change that. It is one thing to not like being at war, and another to interfere with the war effort. Just so you know, I don't like being at war, but we are at war so I am at war. The object is to win and get it over with if possible. A person cannot stay and say they are not at war. We are all at war.
Please show where in the Constitution that this is required. I don't like the peaceniks any more than you do. But I'm not gonna go down the road of saying an American citizen does not have the right to remain in this country, let alone voice an opinion contrary to the war, because we are at war - because then there would be no way to stop a wrong, corrupt war such as the one Clinton waged against Yugoslavia over Kosovo.
There is still free speech. But that doesn't change the fact that we are at war. If the Constitution is suspended, the country is gone, forget it. My point is that we are all together at war and one might be a peacenik and still be at war. The only way to not be at war is to leave. It's still possible to be a conscientious objector, in which case one might be put in a non-combatant role rather than be handed a rifle.
If someone doesn't want to be at war they should move to a different country.
was somewhat vague, but you've qualified it hence.
You are correct. Brandeis is a Jewish founded school, which has 3 chapels for all faiths. The student body is predominately Jewish. During the last Gulf War in 1991, I can recall the threats against the school and the guards posted at the entrance. In the 60's Brandeis was a mini-Berkley - but I think many of the Jewish students see the benefits to this action today and in 1991.
What a bunch of tripe.
How does he know the war was planned before Bush took office?
What violation of treaties?
Is he alluding to the highway robbery Kyoto treaty that the Senate rejected 95 to zip?
Or us getting out of that obsolete treaty like ABM, which had an 6 month withdrawal clause? Mr. Prof. is being dishonest.
War is for the weak?
Huh?
"Making war is for the imagination challenged."
Is that in the DSM-IV?
The Prof. is suffering from the liberal disease disorder of being manly challenged.
Oy! That hurts especially at a university founded by American Jews for Jews. Brandeis has roots in the old Jewish quota system of the Ivy League. Even though founded for Jews, Brandeis has always had many non-Jews attending.
Actually, it is the final completion of a preempted victory. There is nothing "preemptive" about a war that has been on hold for 12 years, waiting for Iraq to comply with 18 UN resolutions.
I am glad that Professor Fellman has some special conduit to knowledge of the terrorism links of Iraq and al Qaida that nobody else has. Maybe he has a "special" relationship with Mr. Hussein.
"I consider war the way of the weak. Making war is for the imagination challenged, it only reasserts masculinity," he added.
Isn't it always the way of liberals to drag their penis envy into a discussion? I think the President has a lot of imagination: he can imagine the sales of VX, ricin, botulinum, anthrax and nuclear weapons to terrorist organizations that will effect his lust for revenge on the U.S. and the Bush family. He can imagine the suffering that the Iraqis have endured under the reign of Hussein terror, one that will continue with his mentally chanllenged, sadistic sons (that is what happens when you marry your cousin!). Wonder why Fellman doesn't mention that? Is he anti-Muslim?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.