Dear Editor,
Politics are beginning to flare as the race for president in November 2008 becomes fierce. One of the forefront issues for these candidates is how they will handle the war in Iraq.
Over the last four years, the American support for this war has declined, and with President Bush’s recent demand to increase troop numbers it has pushed more Americans to question the war.
In the end the American people will determine the fate of the Iraqi war or at least have a large impact on this decision, much like our ancestors did during the civil war.
In 1864, during the height of the civil war, Abraham Lincoln was up for re-election by the Union. The people had the ability to vote for the candidate that would end the war or for one that would continue the fight.
In the end, Lincoln was re-elected and the war was fought until Lee, on the South’s behalf, signed the treaty at Appomattox. This clearly shows the power of the people in our representative democracy and how elections truly affect the future of our nation. What would the United States be like had Lincoln not been re-elected and the civil war ended after the 1864 election? We Americans have the power to make a decision of what we want to take place in Iraq.
Will party lines be crossed by Americans because of the personal feelings on Iraq? Only time will affect this situation and it will be exciting to see if Americans really feel negatively towards the war when it comes down to selecting the primary presidential candidates.
-Jessica Falso

Author