Penn community varied on prospect of war against Iraq

After President Bush's promise of military action against Iraq last night, Penn community members are now preparing for the inevitability of war. Nevertheless, many say that anti-war sentiments are likely to persist. "I think it is disappointing that the way the president has gone about this has led to such a diplomatic blunder," College Democrats President Rich Eisenberg said. However, because war with Iraq will soon be a reality, Eisenberg added that even those against the war should support American forces in spite of their political affiliations. "It's unfortunate that we have come to this point, but we have to support our troops overseas and wish for the best possible outcome," Eisenberg said. Political Science Professor Avery Goldstein said that internationally, people agree that disarmament is necessary, but the means by which the world should accomplish it are points of contention. "President Bush's position is defensible when you are talking about international legal arguments," Goldstein said. "But this is in large measure practical judgments" that will not be decided on the basis of international law. But College Republicans Secretary Daniel Siegman disagreed. "I think the people who claim that he has misinterpreted international law are people that oppose war for political or moral reasons," Siegman said. "Any open-minded person should have been swayed by the evidence he presented." While Goldstein said he doubts Bush's speech was convincing enough to sway anti-war citizens, he agreed that it nevertheless set forth cogent reasons for military action. "I think he pretty much gave a straightforward list of reasons that his administration" believes justifies invading Iraq, Goldstein said. "He included what they see as the legal justification based on surrender documents from the Persian Gulf War as well as subsequent U.N. documents," which urged disarmament. Still, Goldstein said, "my guess is that people's views are hardened and aren't likely to shift very much until the war." Political Science Professor Jack Nagel echoed Goldstein. "He has a very good speechwriter, and it was for the most part a good speech." Nagel said. "I am not sure whether he was able to sway people, though." In his 15-minute address, Bush worked to make his case to Americans, Iraqi citizens and the international community. "I think it is most convincing when he emphasized liberating Iraq from tyranny," Nagel said. "But when he claims that there is a threat to us... he is not convincing on the basis of evidence presented." Following the president's speech, the government announced that they had raised the terrorism threat level to "orange" -- second-highest on a color-coded scale of five. "Clearly, I think the federal government knows something we don't," Siegman said. "That's why we see the FBI going under high alert." The prospect of what appears to be an imminent war has sparked anxiety among students -- in response, various campus offices, including the Office of the Chaplain, the Office of the Vice Provost for University Life and Hillel have sponsored two gatherings for reflection and discussion. Chaplain William Gipson said that the events over the next two days were scheduled because administrators wanted to address growing anxiety among students. Interfaith and community gatherings on the impending war are being held today and tomorrow in Houston Hall at 4 p.m.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.