The Office of Religious Life sponsored a University-wide town hall meeting called “Iraq: Where Do We Go From Here?” yesterday afternoon in Kresge Auditorium. Despite email publicity effort, student turnout at the event was low.

Scotty McLennan, dean of Religious Life, served as the event’s moderator. He was joined by Abbas Milani, a professor of political science and a member of the Hoover Institution, and Allen Weiner, a professor at the Law School.

According to McLennan, the goal of the meeting was to “marshal our resources beyond partisan differences and help policy makers envision a just and lasting peace in Iraq.”

“Instead of debating whether we should have gotten into this war in the first place, this forum is designed as an opportunity to ask together: Where should we go from here in Iraq?” he said.

After McLennan’s introduction, Milani and Weiner each delivered a 15 minute opening speech.

Milani began his statement with a Persian proverb, which he related to the United States’ situation in Iraq.

“It takes one fool to throw a stone in a well; it takes 100 wise men to get it out,” he said. He went on to say that trying to figure out a way for the United States to get out of Iraq is not an easy task.

He disputed the notion that complex issues have simple solutions and emphasized the need for local knowledge — more programs devoted to and people interested in Middle Eastern studies.

Weiner spoke about his frustration and anger regarding the use of force in Iraq, which he said was instituted “with neither particularly sound legal justification nor policy rationale.”

He posed several questions to the audience, attempting to provide answers yet admitting that many of the questions about Iraq need to be explored further.

Following Weiner’s statement, McLennan opened the floor to comments from audience members.

Several attendees emphasized the need for the United States to leave Iraq as quickly as possible.

“Iraqis do not want foreigners in their country telling them what to do,” said Robert Polhemus, an English professor.

Many also criticized the current administration.

“The Bush administration has, with infinite arrogance, destroyed a once functioning country,” said community member Rochelle Marshall.

These sentiments were echoed by others.

Another local resident, Bud Conrad, said he is “bitterly angry about what our government has done,” and Religious Studies Prof. Linda Hess remarked that “we need to capture the White House and Congress to succeed.”

Sophomore Ben Henretig called for Bush’s impeachment.

“I’d just like to see some degree of accountability in the U.S. because I think that’s paramount to pushing anything forward in Iraq,” he said.

Other attendees such as Fernando Gomez, a second-year doctoral student in electrical engineering, expressed support for the invasion of Iraq.

Another audience member emphasized the need to learn from the role the U.S. played in Germany and Japan following World War II, which he deemed an American success.

“If we don’t stay and do the same humanitarian and democratic reforms [in Iraq] that we did after World War II, we will reap the terrible whirlwind forever,” he said.

Milani and Weiner then each offered responses to the audience’s comments.

For his part, Milani emphasized that leaving Iraq immediately is not a possibility.

“If the U.S. suddenly leaves this chaos that has been created, there will be enormous bloodshed,” said Milani, explaining that he supports a benchmark system, by which the U.S. can gradually withdraw troops from Iraq, as a positive first step.

Weiner, like Milani, said that he does not advocate immediate withdrawal.

He referenced the United States’ interest in energy supplies in the Middle East and called for exploration of alternative energy sources to reduce reliance on the region’s oil.

Following the meeting, McLennan remarked that despite the lack of consensus, the meeting was valuable nonetheless.

“A number of us feel an urgency about what’s happening in Iraq and want the University to apply its resources,” he said. “What’s needed is real expertise instead of profound misunderstanding of the history, politics and realities of the region.

“It is the critical issue for our country now,” he added. “We’ve been concerned about how much student engagement there is in the issue — you know, not very much.”

Students gave mixed reviews of the event.

“I was hoping it’d be well-attended, especially by students, and I was very disappointed about that,” said Aubrey Munoz, a sophomore. “But I thought in general the speakers provided very balanced views, and I definitely heard new perspectives on what’s going on in Iraq. It was refreshing to have expert viewpoints on these very complicated issues.”

Gomez disagreed, calling the meeting biased.

“It should have been advertised as the anti-war talk of Iraq or something like that because it was not really balanced,” he said. “Both speakers were very knowledgeable and I appreciate that, but even if they tried to be pragmatic about the future, they were clearly biased against the war.”