To the Editor,
In the midst of current optimism surrounding the future of the University of Maine System, and our new Chancellor proposing aggressive budget increases, it is disheartening to learn that the future of the Maine Scholar is in question. I have stumbled across past editions in local bookstores and read a number of back issues. The content is always engaging, and its publication by the University speaks to its commitment to a free-ranging discussion of timely academic and philosophical ideas and a much needed forum for poetry. I hope that the Maine Scholar can continue to be published as a voice for students and academics from within Maine and elsewhere, and to ensure that our commitment to academia is properly publicized.
I do want to mention that, although I support the good work that Editor Wanda Whitten carries out on behalf of the Scholar, she is mistaken that it is the only academic journal throughout the UMaine System, as quoted in the article published 10/7/02 in The Free Press. The University Maine School of Law publishes two nationally recognized journals, the Maine Law Review and the Ocean and Coastal Law Journal, which are both widely distributed to law libraries and through personal subscriptions throughout the country. Both of these journals publish articles by judges, professors, and practitioners, as well as notes and comments written by students on current legal cases and problems. The success of these two academic journals only strengthen the reasons for continuing to support publication of the Maine Scholar.
Phil Saucier
second year student
University of Maine School of Law
To the Editor,
In a discussion of the looming possibility of a United States invasion of Iraq, I believe it is critical to keep an open mind to several points. Our administration has been putting forth extraordinary effort to convince us that we must remove Saddam Hussein from power immediately. While there is little to debate about Hussein’s cruelty as a person, the question remains: Why the sudden push for war? What are we really trying to do?
First of all, Iraq’s military capacity is far weaker after sanctions and years of unrelenting bombings by our forces. They have a fraction of the offensive capabilities that they had in the 80s when the U.S. quietly supported Hussein during the peak of his military capacities. Russ Christenson, a former civil rights lawyer, comments in last week’s Portland Phoenix, “.he was our evil man. We loved him. Our government provided him with all the money he needed to make weapons of mass destruction, because he was willing to go to war against the Iranians.” So why do we want him gone so bad now when the threat is less? There have been rumors of a link between Al-Qaida and Hussein, but these allegations by our administration have never been backed up by any evidence. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) says the CIA has “absolutely no evidence” that Iraq possesses or will soon possess nuclear weapons. There has not been even a vague link between Iraq and terrorist activities since an alleged plot to assassinate President George Bush when he visited Kuwait in 1993.
Not least on the list of concerns is the legitimacy of our right to attack Iraq with no evidence to back up allegations. Iraq’s recent actions have done nothing to warrant the immediate concern, and so according to U.N. regulations we have no right to invade Baghdad. If we do, it creates chaos because if we do not abide by Security Council regulations, than why should anybody else? If we are really in the business of being the “Global Peacekeeper,” the title we have bestowed upon ourselves, then why not let our mission speak for itself?
If this is as just a cause as President Bush claims it is, then shouldn’t world leaders be united in support for this invasion? Henry Kissinger says, “The notion of justified preemption runs counter to modern international law, which sanctions the use of force in self-defense only against actual – not potential – threats.” Kissinger also says, “American military intervention in Iraq would be supported only grudgingly, if at all, by most European allies.” There is little world support, and there is much unabashed opposition. If an experienced human rights activist like Nelson Mandela, a man who has no vested interest in the affair, also denounces our proposed war, I see an immediate warning flag raised.
Supposing we do invade, the risks of an unconventional attack on America similar to Sept. 11 actually become greater. With nothing to lose, and a likely realization that the U.S. is too powerful on the battlefield, the chances that Iraq decides to do something drastic go way up. Taking this into consideration: don’t the chances of another Sept. 11 actually get higher? He did not use any of his alleged nuclear capabilities in the gulf war when he had many times the resources. This was because he feared sanctions, but now he would probably see no alternative.
However, these are facts that our administration does not wish to inform us about. Our government says the issue is cut-and-dry We have to get Saddam, because he is evil. It is just not as simple as ‘Saddam is a threat and must be removed.’ The focus is on him right now, but the war on terrorism opens up possibilities to an endless war. There is little support in the Middle East for the U.S. and the amount of civilian casualties that are sure to result from urban warfare in Iraqi cities puts us in even more peril.
We cannot allow ourselves to be sucked into the war fervor that our administration and mass media attempt to hammer us with. With all the evidence out there, that justification for this war with Iraq is fabricated, we should be insulted by the way the Bush administration tries to blind us with hate and fear. I think that this war could lead to way more bloodshed than we realize. This will NOT be another Gulf war. If this war is allowed to happen then this will be the beginning of many more wars against terror, and countries that pose a threat to the United States. Bush’s proclaimed “endless” war on terror will become just that: An endless war for the rest of our lives. I urge anybody who desires peace to contact our senators and representatives (or members of our congressional delegation) and voice your disapproval of this war.
Patrick Liddy
senior
history major
To the Editor:
Last week’s Free Press included an ad for a free scholarship search from “BrokeScholar.” In addition to outside scholarship resources, I would like to take this opportunity to remind students that USM’s scholarships for the 2003-04 academic year will be listed on USM’s Financial Aid website (www.usm.maine.edu/fin/schint00.htm) in January, 2003. Most of USM scholarships have a deadline of the last Friday of February, 2003. I encourage students to review scholarship opportunities as well as federal financial aid opportunities. If students have questions regarding financial aid or the USM scholarships they are welcomed to contact me at 780-4166.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Norma S. Catalano
Assistant Director, Financial Aid.