The student news site of Guilford College

The Guilfordian

The student news site of Guilford College

The Guilfordian

The student news site of Guilford College

The Guilfordian

Iraq Not as Big a Threat as North Korea

If we ever needed more proof that people are more afraid of the unknown than what is known, we need to look no further than what is going on in the world today. What don’t we know about in the world today? We don’t know what kind of weapons Saddam has laying the around his palace and we don’t really know for sure if we are going to go to war with Iraq, although all signs point to the idea that we are going to go to war.

But that is not the point of this article; the point is that many Americans are scared, (and rightfully so), of what could happen with Iraq, but quite honestly, Iraq scares me very little compared to other situations going on in the world today. One in particular is perhaps just as important and the odds of this problem hitting the fan and wiping out major American cities seem to be more likely.

Here I am talking about the recent revelation that North Korea has been developing nuclear weapons, and now has, or will very shortly have, usable nuclear weapons. Now call me paranoid, but that seems to be a lot scarier than some lunatic in Iraq that could have weapons.

Here is why North Korea is scarier than Iraq: because it does have the bombs, and, for all we know, the premier could wake up one morning, decide that he no longer has the will to live and let loose a full-blown nuclear assault on any country he wished.

So here comes the argument that if our president has access to our own nuclear weapons, why are we holding a double standard towards other countries, saying that they cannot have them also?

First off, I don’t think any country should have them, but that’s beside the point. I would rather have our president with his finger on the button, than the leader of a Communist country, who has tested missiles against other countries surrounding him. See, call me a right wing loony toon, but that’s just how I feel.

Perhaps most striking to me about all of these events, is how this is being spun by the White House as almost a non-issue in the sense that yes, this is bad, but this issue can be solved with a little diplomacy and maybe a homemade apple pie to smooth over the rift.

But why has our president decided to use diplomacy with North Korea, but seems to have a penchant for war when it comes to Iraq?

The reason for this is simple: this recent revelation has caught our president with his pants down, and he finds himself in a very unenviable position. “By Bush’s own doctrine of pre-emption, the U.S. should strike against any state with weapons of mass destruction and an irresponsible dictator. But the consequences of attacking Pyongyang are unacceptable. What Bush apparently never anticipated was a brazen admission that the evidence was right,” (Time magazine 10/28, Johanna McGeary).

The president finds himself in somewhat of a lose-lose situation, and this something rather new for him. For too long he has been strutting around about how well we took care of Afghanistan, and how we can handle Iraq completely. This needs to serve as an important reminder to the president that we are invulnerable to another country and that they could put us in a precarious position.

Our president needs to step back, and while I am not saying he should put Iraq on the backburner, I am saying that he needs to expand his tunnel-vision. If he does not, then this “war on terrorism” only looks like an elaborate excuse to go to war. Of course, we might already be there.

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Comments (0)

The Guilfordian intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks, or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. Comments are reviewed and must be approved by a moderator to ensure that they meet these standards. The Guilfordian does not allow anonymous comments, and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments.
All The Guilfordian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *