As a former Marine and brother of a Marine currently in Iraq, I am saddened, sickened and frustrated by the activities of free people around the world.  One of the strongest emotions I feel is one of disbelief. It is quite clear that most of the protesters and demonstrators are in the streets because of strong beliefs, but unfortunately most of those beliefs are based on poor facts, ignorance and naivete. Before even discussing Iraq, there are two common issues of anti-Americanism and the antiwar sentiment that I must address.

No country in the history of the world has done more, given more or protected more than the United States. No people have ever been freer than Americans. We are not conquerors, we are liberators. Just look at Kuwait, Serbia, Afghanistan, Germany, Japan and, soon, Iraq.   Remember the American blood that was spilled on the shores of France, to give the French people their freedom. Where in history has a country defeated such ruthless foes as Japan and Germany, then rebuilt those countries to become powerful, independent and free nations in less than 40 years? And, at what financial cost to America?

We are often portrayed as bullies who are only concerned with our economic interests. Europe and the U.N. sat and watched as Slobodan Milosevic and the Serbs slaughtered thousands upon thousands of Croats and Muslims. It was not until the U.S. led a force to remove him from power that peace was brought to the region. Had it not been for the U.S., he would still be in power today. Where is our economic interest in Yugoslavia? Why didn't the Europeans intervene? We must act because no one else will.

No rational person wants war or advocates violence. However, to believe you can live in a world without war is naive. Freedoms are not given, they are fought for and earned. It is only through war that I have the ability to write this e-mail. World history has been dominated by monarchies, emperors, dictators and tyrants. Millions have been executed and tortured for divergent political and religious views. We only have democracies and freedoms because we fought for them. Blood has been spilled time and time again to protect and preserve that freedom and, whether you like it or not, the sacrifice must continue as long as mankind continues.

My brother is in Iraq for you. Not because he wanted a free ride to college or because he wanted to learn a trade in the military, but because he realizes the value of freedom. He wanted to serve and risk his life for something greater than himself. I pray he will not have to make that ultimate sacrifice, but I also pray that you will recognize your freedom, realize how it came to be and support him and our troops. Every freedom you have, no matter where you are in the world, was provided by someone's blood.

I think the following tribute to the soldiers (and Marines) makes the point.

On to Iraq...

There are three valid justifications for the current actions in Iraq. If you
disagree with one, then pick another.

1) Terrorism
Since 9/11, our entire world has changed. The threats we face have changed and so must our strategy and tactics in facing them. There is no reasoning with these terrorists and rogue states. The terrorists have no land or possessions they hold sacred, so there can be no negotiation. They want nothing more than to destroy our way of life. We must be proactive and preemptive in our action, or the next 9/11 will pale in comparison to the last. With a common hatred for America between Saddam Hussein (who tried to assassinate an American President) and Al Quaeda (who killed 3,000 people on American soil) a link beyond a reasonable doubt need not be made.  With Saddam's known WMD capabilities and Al Quaeda's known desire to acquire them, the possibility and probability of an exchange is enough to act.

2) Weapons of Mass Destruction
There is no question and no doubt that Saddam Hussein possess WMDs.  Iraq has acknowledged having anthrax, botulinum toxin, aflatoxin, gas gangrene, VX nerve agent, mustard gas and other nerve agents. Where are they? There are thousands and thousands of tons of these deadly materials unaccounted for.  No one questions Iraq's ability to develop and manufacture these weapons, especially the tens of thousands of Kurds that were gassed in Northern Iraq in 1988. Why can't Iraq account for the supposed destruction of these weapons? Much of the information we have on these WMDs comes not from some government official in Washington, but from Hussein Kamel, Saddam's own son-in-law, who defected in 1995 and later returned to Iraq to be executed.  The information from Hussein Kamel has since been corrob rated by many more defectors.  Make no mistake, these weapons exist.

3) Twelve years and 17 U.N. Resolution Violations
The Gulf War never officially ended but was rather a conditional cease-fire signed by Iraq on the condition that they immediately disclose all WMDs and cease all production and development of WMDs. Obviously, this never happened. Each time U.N. inspectors found something new or a defector provided new information, Iraq produced a new, "complete and final declaration" of their weapons programs. There have been at least eight of these final declarations, the most recent of which was submitted in December.    The U.N. has done a deplorable job in protecting the world and ensuring Iraq disarms.    In September of 2001, under U.S. pressure, the U.N. stepped up efforts to disarm Iraq and, shortly thereafter, passed U.N. Resolution 1441. Since Iraq had violated the 16 previous resolutions, this resolution was to be Iraq's last chance for "immediate active and unconditional cooperation" under penalty of "serious consequences." To this day, NOT ONE Security Council member has claimed Iraq has given immediate and unconditional cooperation. Not the French, not the Russians, not the Chinese. NO ONE.    All have acknowledged that Iraq has not fully complied.  Once again, if the U.S. does not act, no one will.

Finally, for humanitarian reasons, the U.N. must end the sanctions against the Iraqi people. Iraq has an educated middle class, vast natural resources and the potential to be an economically thriving, democratic Middle Eastern nation. This cannot take place while Saddam Hussein is in power.

To dispel a few misconceptions:

1) The U.N.
The United Nations is not an impartial, unbiased world court. It is apolitical body and each member country has its own political agenda. France and Russia will stand to lose the most when the regime of Saddam Hussein falls. The oil contracts between France and Iraq are not a secret. It has been said that Iraq owes France over $8 billion and according to BBC News, "even in 2001, France sold Iraq $650 million worth of goods, more than any other country, and was the Western country with the largest number of stands at last November's Baghdad Trade Fair." Just today (3/24/03), the Washington Post is reporting that the Russians have been selling military equipment, including night vision capabilities and electronic jamming equipment with the sole purpose of sending incoming GPS guided missiles astray. It was also reported that Russian technicians were in Iraq as late as last week.

2) The U.S. is taking unilateral action against the rest of the world. On Thursday, March 20, the U.S. State Department released a list of 42 nations it describes as the "Coalition for the Immediate Disarmament of Iraq."  They are: Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Britain, Bulgaria, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, Uganda and Uzbekistan.

3) This is a "rush to war."
This little catch phrase has been made popular by some Hollywood stars in recent days and suggests that suddenly, out of nowhere, America just decided on war. The diplomatic process to disarm Iraq has been underway for 12 years at most and 18 months at least, since President Bush first spoke to the U.N. in Sept. 2001.

4) This is "blood for oil."
As George Will has said, this slogan is neither intelligent nor honorable." The "blood for oil" catch phase is meant to create paranoia and suggest the U.S. has an economic motive. Fact is, just the threat of war added more than $10 to the price of oil per barrel. The war itself is estimated to cost billions, if not trillions. If oil were America's motive, then President Bush should consider invading Canada.  Only 58% of the oil we use is imported and Canada is America's No. 1 source of oil. America's second and third largest suppliers of oil are Mexico and Venezuela. Iraq is a member of OPEC, whose oil production is regulated by the 11-member organization. The "blood for oil" phrase is another propagandist tool.

Of all the protests and demonstrations, it is the American protesters that hurt the most. In addition to all I have said, Americans must come to realize that WE are the target. Not Europe, not Asia, but America. When terrorists get anthrax or nerve gas, they will unleash them in New York City, not Paris. It is not for the French or the Germans to decide our safety and security. We must come together and face this threat. So I say to these protesters: For the sake of your children and your children's children, put down your signs and support our troops.

Bill Quarless
BillQuarless@aol.com
brother of Corporal James A. Quarless, USMC