Posted on 05/11/2004 10:12:54 PM PDT by churchillbuff
I was wrong. It's that simple.
When the Bush administration announced its plan to invade Iraq early last year, I supported them. I thought, like so many millions of others did, that the American forces would be in and out of there before you could say Grenada.
I truly believed that Saddam would be toppled and a new government set up within a year, with minimal American casualties.
I also thought that in such a quick conflict, Bush could finish the job that his old man couldn't, and that it would send a message about American resolve that needed to be sent. The backing of countries like France, Russia and China means nothing to me in any conflict, and the fact that they, and the United Nations, were not involved was a non-factor. (Actually, that part of my mind hasn't changed. The day that I start thinking that a war's okay because France thinks so is not one I'll wake up to in this lifetime.)
Worst still to come
Unfortunately for everyone involved, the American forces in Iraq have been mired in a hellish combat zone for well over a year, and by many accounts, the worst is yet to come. The Bush administration has blindly stumbled through the minefield that is Iraq for the past 15 months, ignoring advice from the many experts on the subject, including their own military, intelligence agencies and diplomats.
As I heard Senator Joe Biden say on Face the Nation on Sunday, Bush hasn't even listened to his own generals.
With the creepy and shifty Donald Rumsfeld and the downright scary Paul Wolfowitz running the civilian command of the military, it's their way or the highway. It's become quite clear that Bush, both before and after the actual invasion, has tossed aside any advice that doesn't fully and completely support his own foregone conclusions.
The arrogance that seeps from the Bush White House is mind-numbing, and although most American polls show running Bush neck and neck with Democratic challenger John Kerry for this November's presidential election, I think that has a lot more to do with the anemic state of Kerry's campaign than it does with support for the incumbent. One of the many areas in which Bush has really lost my respect is with this ludicrous notion that if you're not behind the War in Iraq, you're soft on terrorism. The Deliverance extras living in Tennessee trailer parks may go for that one, but few others will.
The most recent controversy -- the alleged mistreatment of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison -- is a pivotal point for the American forces. It shows the frustration that many American soldiers face daily. These soldiers are seeing their friends and fellow servicemen killed or maimed in the most cowardly ways imaginable. Suicide bombings, car bombs, ambushes. There's no blow too low for this enemy. I recall one story last year, before the last links of trust and goodwill had rightfully disappeared from the average American soldier's psyche, when a squad of marines stopped to help an Iraqi cab driver, whose vehicle was disabled at the side of the road. As the soldiers approached, the "cabbie" hit a detonator switch and blew the car, himself and the soldiers to smithereens.
Not playing by rules
How on earth can American soldiers continue to battle with an enemy who doesn't play by any rules at all? The short answer is, they can't.
The frustration oozing from the Abu Ghraib prison won't disappear. It will get worse. And it's no fault of the soldiers.
Damn those who blame this on kids from America's heartland who go halfway across the world to fight an enemy who knows no Geneva Convention, no Marquis of Queensbury rules, no rules of engagement that even approach reason or fair play.
The Iraqi insurgents, like terrorists world-wide, know that the American military has to play by the rules, and it's their goal to turn the American media, and the American people, against their own military.
With the Abu Ghraib prison abuse story hitting North American headlines, and the sickening sanctimony of the North American media, the insurgents have, to use a perfectly American analogy, "hit a home run."
The irony here, of course, is that the atrocities committed at the prison by Americans on Iraqis don't hold a candle to the abuses that Iraqis heaped upon each other, at the very same facility, under Saddam.
Although I've changed my mind on my support for this war, and those politicians who started it, my support for the soldiers who are over there fighting for their lives in the world's most unfair theatre of combat, has not changed a bit. I just hope they make it home alive.
And I'm sure that's the goal that many have set for themselves: Just survive. Because this war is no longer about freedom or terror, it's about one man's political agenda, and dead American soldiers are obviously not about to get in his way. I thought it was about more than that. I was wrong.
This is one of the stupidest statements I've seen recently. If all you have to defeat superior forces is to "not play by the rules," then either a) we may as well surrender to the terrorists and anyone else out there who doesn't feel like playing by "the rules," or b) our soldiers simply have to adapt and deal with it. That may mean not by playing by any rules ourselves. I wouldn't mind that.
The idea that you have to give up if the other side "doesn't play by the right rules," that gives me a good ol' chuckle.
When we need an old rust-bucket Canadian destroyer for a political show prop, we'll call you.
Until then, just stay the hell out of the way.
One thing --- Bush never implied this was going to be some overnight conflict. This is a war of good versus evil and millions of people are caught up in this evil --- it's going to be a very long struggle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.