Editor,
It is well-proven that decisions made from a faulty premise are frequently flawed.
The purpose of discussion and debate is to flush out errors and decide, based upon fact, what is the best action to take.
If our military is accomplishing its objectives in Iraq and they are worthy, then why retreat? If the opposite is true, fix the flaws or leave.
Determining which is true is largely objective. Respecting the opinion of those who believe that all war is wrong is recognizing the subjective.
I see the letters of Carol Lovato and Joachim Oberst, published in the Daily Lobo on March 5 and Feb. 28, as coming from flawed premises and subjective - America is wrong; just bring home the troops.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
Some facts: The number of Iraqis killed from all violent causes between March 2003 and June 2006 is 151,000, according to the New England Journal of Medicine and the Iraq Health Ministry. The 600,000 number is not accurate.
According to the U.N., 1,000,000 Iraqis, including 500,000 children, died because of the U.N. sanctions.
The theft in the oil-for-food program caused additional hardships for the Iraqi people. Iraqi expert Stephen Cass says, "Along with other human rights organizations, the Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam (Hussein) killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran.
Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power."
Not included are those who survived his torture. I believe every violent death is a tragedy. History teaches that Husseins never stop their violence willingly. To remove him, some innocent people died from our actions.
Therefore, the debate should be: Have we saved the lives of more Iraqi people by removing Hussein? Have we done what is right? Was there another way to accomplish the goal of removing a mass murderer?
We need to condemn the actions of al-Qaida. In December 2007, it released a video showing the execution of five men by dousing them with a flammable liquid and then throwing them alive into a fire pit.
Al-Qaida murders Iraqi children at play, women shopping, people going about daily life and then paramedics who come to the aid of the injured. It does this with bombs strapped to innocent people.
The agenda is to terrorize Iraq's people so they can be oppressed by the dictatorial government of al-Qaida. How many more will al-Qaida kill if we are not helping the Iraqi people? Shouldn't we debate our obligation to help the Iraqi people be free? How is our security enhanced when the bombers die over there and we, with the Iraqi police, are arresting al-Qaida's leaders?
Al-Qaida was murdering people before we invaded Iraq. Remember Sept. 11? This movement was founded in 1928 in Egypt. Since then, thousands have died at its hands.
Hyperbole is not fact. Debating what is best for our nation is too important to be based on false premises. That is why we must challenge every erroneous statement.
Philip Howell
Daily Lobo reader
