This letter is a reaction to the Feb. 6 editorial “Case for war outlined by Powell’s speech.” Coming from a daily newspaper serving a university community, the editorial was very disappointing.

A university community, to my understanding, consists of people who are taught to critically examine issues before they react to them. I expect a paper serving this community to be its replica. In this editorial, however, I see you as having thrown this ideal to the dustbin. Your editorial, rather than analyzing Powell’s speech as is expected of a university daily, seems to be a mere narration of what Powell presented last week as evidence of Iraq’s violation of U.N. Resolution 1441.

The questions I would have expected you to raise and address are: Has Powell really presented convincing evidence against Iraq? If Powell was presenting his pictures and “intercepted conversations” as evidence before an American court of law would it suffice for a jury to pass a judgement against a suspect?

Furthermore, supposing Powell’s package of evidence was true, does that justify a war on Iraq? Certainly not. I think inspectors were sent to Iraq to confirm Iraq’s compliance/noncompliance with the U.N. resolution and destroy any identified weapons of mass destruction. If Powell has knowledge of the whereabouts of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction the reaction should never be war. Rather, Powell’s “intelligence” should be used to guide the U.N. inspectors in Iraq to locate and destroy these weapons.

Bello Umar

Visiting Fulbright Scholar