“If this is an international problem, doesn’t it demand an international solution?” he asked.

Rangel also questioned the Bush administration’s cooperation with the U.N. investigation of Iraq, saying that if U.S. officials have intelligence implicating Iraq, they should share it with weapons inspectors.

He also criticized the Administration’s vocal approach in combatting “evil” countries.

“If you really believe that there are people out there who want to hurt you, you don’t start off by insulting them,” Rangel said.

The representative said that the religious subtext to conflict in the Middle East has not been sufficiently understood and addressed.

“Somebody tell me why this is not going to be interpreted in the region as Christians and Jews against Muslims?” he asked.

Rangel also raised the question of why the U.S. should take on Iraq when North Korea and Saudi Arabia are also potentially more pressing foes.

Moreover, Rangel raised the point that he doesn’t think Bush should unilaterally declare war on behalf of the country.

“I’m a member of Congress,” he said. “We declare war.”

Drafting Debate?

In his speech, Rangel quickly moved from political attack to social critique, and emphasized that students should get involved in the debate over war.

“More people should be participating in the debate,” he said. “We cannot sit out this dance.”

One analysis in Sunday’s New York Times suggested that Rangel’s address “could illustrate whether the draft still has the capacity to stir crowds on college campuses.”

Institute of Politics (IOP) Director Dan Glickman, a former representative (D-Kan.), said yesterday that he believes a draft debate could swiftly put an end to political apathy on college campuses.

But some say that unless people feel a draft seems imminent, the war debate will stagnate.