Letters and Emails

Global awareness, not unilateral violence, desperately needed to solve issues with Iraq

I WOULD LIKE to respond to Mr. Hatcher's letter (Oct. 24) about ousting Saddam Hussein. I find it backwards that in order for the U.S. to have "clout" and promote peace, it needs to go to war with Iraq. How can we say we are doing something for peace, but pursue a resolution with non-peaceful methods?

We have no moral or legal right to unilaterally go to war with Iraq. Apart from the UN, we lack legitimate authority. We have no concrete proof that Hussein is a direct threat to the U.S. or to our allies.

Bush and his cabinet created a plan to attack Iraq and secure a regime change before even taking office. This was evidenced in a document, Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century, which was written before the whole "war on terror" broke out. The document reveals that Bush was going into Iraq, not because of Hussein, but because of his desire to gain power in the Persian Gulf region.

Is it not time that we take into consideration some of the other voices around the world and maybe learn from the long histories that these countries possess? We should stop focusing on ridding the world of Hussein and start working with world communities to enact change through peaceful and diplomatic means. Let us utilize our incredible power as a nation of free people to fight for justice at home and abroad through peaceful measures.

Joshua Sbicca, psychology, '05Students often use minority status solely as means of achieving special priveliges

HAD DIVERSITY BEEN a priority in the Manhattan Project's formation, how many of us at Santa Clara would now be speaking either German or Japanese (as a first language) and how many would be lampshades? It's a fair question for the amateur social anthropologists at the Multicultural Center to ponder. Replace Enrico Fermi with someone of the "correct" skin tone (for multiculturalism's sake), and the Germans surely would have beaten us to the bomb.

A product of California's public school system, I've always known to check the box that, the system says, corresponds to my Hispanic identity. I respect my heritage. I speak Spanish, eat the food and engage in some of the customs. However, where my parents and grandparents came from doesn't define me as an individual. The fact that others define themselves so strictly upon such a factor (and demand action solely based upon it) outrages me as a member of a "minority community." It's an out-of-control drumbeat devoid of critical thought.

The Greco-Roman concept of individual sovereignty is a key component of the American culture. That's right: "American culture." The failure to realize a satisfactory self-image, I believe, permeates the obsession with attaching oneself to ancestral cultures into which one is no longer locked. Concentrate on your studies instead of worrying about the number of people who look like you on campus. It's shallow, and in such an important case as that above, suicidal.

Rene Cardenas, history, '04