October 2, 2002WASHINGTON, DC -- Politicians who are debating the war on Iraq are misleading the American people, Libertarians say, by ignoring the casualties that could occur inside the United States.
"Saddam Hussein and his army won't be the only ones who suffer from a U.S. invasion," said George Getz, Libertarian Party communications director. "The financial costs of this war could cripple an already struggling American economy, and the human costs of any war are incalculable. So why are politicians blithely ignoring these domestic casualties?"
President Bush and House leaders agreed early Wednesday on a war resolution that gives Bush broad powers to deal with Iraq, and the Senate is scheduled to take up the matter later in the day.
But missing from the debate, Libertarians say, is an acknowledgment that the war could have devastating consequences for America as well as for Iraq. For example, attacking Iraq may:
Unfortunately, Americans shouldn't be surprised that the government refuses to discuss the war's domestic impact, Libertarians say.
- Trigger another September 11-like terror attack.
"The government says al Qaeda cells are operating inside the United States," Getz said. "If that's the case, launching an attack on an Arab nation could give these terrorists another incentive to murder scores of innocent men, women, and children. Why are saber-rattling politicians so silent about that possibility?"
- Cause U.S. troops to be targeted with weapons of mass destruction.
"Attacking Iraq could prompt Saddam to unleash chemical and biological weapons if he has them," Getz said. "But here's one surefire way to protect our troops from such a horrific attack: Keep them out of Iraq."
- Subject U.S. troops and other Americans in the Middle East to a nuclear attack.
"In the event of a U.S. invasion, Saddam may lob Scud missiles at Israel, as he did during the Gulf War," Getz said. "But this time Israel says it will retaliate, perhaps with nuclear weapons. If that occurs, the lives of everyone in the region would be at risk of annihilation."
- Harm the economy.
"Lawrence Lindsey, Bush's chief economic adviser, estimates that the war will cost $100 billion to $200 billion, not including the costs of occupying Iraq," Getz said. "With the economy in recession, the government should be slashing federal spending, not increasing it."
- Cause the stock market to plummet even further.
"The major stock indexes have suffered their worst quarterly loss since the crash of '87 – a drop that many analysts attribute to war fears," Getz said. "As a result, millions of Americans have seen their retirement savings evaporate. Politicians may be aiming their guns at Saddam Hussein, but they've blown a hole in Americans' financial security. How much further will the markets fall when the war actually begins?"
- Force taxpayers to foot the bill for nation-building.
"Even when the war is over for Saddam Hussein, it won't be over for American taxpayers," Getz said. "In fact National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice says the U.S. will be 'completely devoted' to rebuilding Iraq. But wouldn't taxpayers be better off if the government didn't destroy other nations in the first place? And didn't conservatives ridicule nation-building back when Bill Clinton was doing it in Somalia?"
"Politicians treat war like every other government program, by overestimating the benefits, underestimating the true costs – and lying about who's really going to pay," Getz said.
"The truth is that the unanticipated consequences of war pose a clear and present danger to every American, and it's time to be straight about that."