Posted on 06/27/2003 6:53:29 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
The Uneasy War
by Cathryn Crawford
Well, here we are, with a newly liberated Iraq. Did I just say that? Oh, I didnt really mean it. I was only parroting what Ive heard every other talking head saying on every other news station. Its easy to get in the habit of, with all the back-slapping going on in Washington. The phrase an uneasy peace being used as it is in the case of the Operation Iraqi Freedom, it sounds rather silly. As a matter of fact, the prospects of peace in Iraq seem to worsen by the day, and calling Iraq liberated simply doesnt make sense.
There are disturbing incidents every day in the newly liberated Iraq. U.S. troops, British troops, and Iraqi civilians are being injured and killed every day by acts of violence specifically targeted against the peacekeeping forces. The attacks appear to be well planned, well orchestrated, and well funded. Someone is running a behind the scenes opposition to the U.S. forces, and whether or not it is, indeed, a new terrorist group, or, more than likely, members of the old regime, is a moot point. The fact is, it doesnt look good for Bush and his administration when every day brings word of new attacks and new deaths.
At the best guesstimate of the Pentagon, an average of 25 attacks are carried out against peacekeepers during every 24 hour period. Even considering the size of Iraq, that is still a huge number, and its enough to raise questions and keep the heat on Washington to hurry up and get this done, and get our troops back home and out of harms way.
Some are tossing around the idea that having combat troops as peacekeepers is simply a bad idea. Citizens of Iraq arent seeing them as liberators anymore like Americans, they have a short memory and instead see them as an occupying force. Stability, however, is needed. Who is to do it besides U.S. troops? Do we allow the United Nations nation builders in? They have a tendency to royally screw up everything they put their hands on and who will take the blame if Iraqs economy and infrastructure continues to worsen under the guidance of the U.N.? Certainly not the U.N. itself! At least with our own troops and peacekeepers in the region, we will be certain of exactly who is at fault if things dont improve in a reasonable amount of time and the blame will be applied to the right party.
That being said, there is the argument that more civilians should be put in charge in Iraq, and that is, indeed, a legitimate point. Civil engineers, electricians, and other skilled technicians are needed but they can only do their jobs after the problems of violence have been solved. The tearing down has to stop before the building back up can begin.
Vandalism and attacks on the infrastructure in Iraq are a real problem as well, and here we see an even more devious plan at work by the planners of these events. Electricity to Baghdad has been sporadic and even non-existent at times. In a city where the average temperature in June during the day is around 120 degrees, this is not only a source of irritation it is life-threatening. Who will be dying from the actions of the opposition groups? Iraqi civilians - men, women, and children. More to the point, however, is who is being blamed for the deaths of these citizens. Its not the opposition groups.
All of it - the lack of electricity and fresh water, the attacks on the oil pipelines these are being carried out by opposition forces, but the blame is being put squarely on the heads of the U.S. forces. The result is that these problems only exacerbate the already great tension and unrest between Iraqi citizens and the US military. In fact, it is a certainty that is causes even more and greater incidents. It angers the locals, and, even worse, it makes recruitment for opposition and terrorist groups easier. Angry locals wont hesitate to lash out, and the incentives the common cause, the spectacular violence will outweigh any possible punishments. They already face death in their mind, they have nothing to lose.
The war is a psychological one as well as a physical one. To say that simply because someone stood up and said We won! makes it so is foolish to the extreme. There is, at this point, no peace in Iraq. To say that Iraq is at peace is as foolish as saying that there is peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The war hasnt been won. There is no liberation. Iraqi citizens are still living under the tyranny of the old regime; it is simply not as open as it once was.
Liberation will not be achieved - the war will not be over - until all the opposition is rooted out and the acts of violence and vandalism against both civilians and troops is stopped. Whether you agreed with this war or not, you cannot logically say that its finished. It is a case of the wrong words being used by the government this is not an uneasy peace, this is an uneasy war.
As Helmut Schoeck wrote in his landmark book Envy: A Theory Of Social Behaviour, ingratitude and resentment are the norm in response to benevolence. The window during which our forces in Iraq will be viewed favorably -- as the liberators they are -- might be closing. That the closure might be the work of Baathist survivors intent on expelling us by stealthy means is ultimately irrelevant to the effectiveness of their tactics.
What ought to be done about it? Good question. I hope someone has some ideas.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com
A difficult task indeed. But IMHO it WILL get done.
Yep! Most people just don't get it. Our society of instant gratification has no comprehension of what is going on. March 19th we were poised for a war. It has been a whole three months and Iraq still isn't operating like a well oiled democratic machine.
Three months and we are having problems? Give me a break...
I seriously doubt the author of this article has been to Iraq, considering she is a FReeper and posting here daily. My brother just got back from Iraq and tells a whole different story then this desktop commando Cathryn Crawford.
Is it? Iraq is the size of California. Do you think there are 25 violent acts per day in CA? Now, you might say, "Well, not attacks against the police." OK. But California does not have a recently defeated enemy army that has gone to the bushes. I don't think this is unusual at all. Britain fought a TEN YEAR anti-guerrilla war in Malaya---and won. When you are dealing with a situation where you do not want to wipe out the entire population (i.e., Germany or Japan), but only the "bad guys," it does take time and isn't easy. But necessary.
Yeah! Look how much trouble we are having getting rid of the liberals and libertarians here in the USA...and don't even get me started on the brigadeers!
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.