I am starting to think going to Iraq was a mistake

MMI | 4/30/04 | MDP

[Check_Your_Premises]

As an avid supporter of the President's Iraq policies, the last few days have been difficult for me. The number of casualties seemed to reach a "critical mass" for me. I found myself simply not caring to sacrifice anymore of our brave soldiers for Iraqi independence and democracy. Screw 'em.

I was not sure why I began to feel this way. As I said I am an avid supporter of the plan to bring an oasis of freedom and liberty to the 12th century toilet that is the middle east. It seemed to me that if we are to end terrorism we have to destroy the sources, which are the failed states and ideology of that region.

Why not? We have succeeded at such things in the past. We transformed post war Germany and Japan into thriving and peaceful democracies. Unfortunately, we have also failed at such things in the past. Of course, I am speaking of the war that Teddy Kennedy's brother got us into.

The one problem I had with liberating Iraq from Saddam's clutches is that we were removing one of the most important steps to the forming of a successful democracy. The successful overthrow of tyranny is a process that produces the type of leaders that are required to bring the successful transition from tyranny to liberal democracy. By liberating Iraq, for the Iraqis we were not allowing their "Founding Fathers" to become. It is of course worth noting that such leaders may never have been produced.

It seems to me now that the war in Iraq suffers from the same fatal flaw as the war in Vietnam. I may be speculating here, but it seems we simply cared more than the South Vietnamese, that their nation remain free. No American should be expected to die defending the home of another not willing to do the same. In the same sense we seem to care more about the freedom of the Iraqi people than they do themselves. This is why I don't really care anymore. If they truly cared or understood their fate, they would be dying ten to our one. And in that case I think the American people would support them steadfastly. God knows I would.

So what was different about our success stories, Japan and Germany. Well we basically bombed the entire nation back into the stone age. I think their civilians were probably so glad that we weren't going to execute our own "final solution" to the "Japanese and German question", that they were willing to do whatever we said. It is also worth noting that in annhilating their armies we effectively removed any person who would be opposed to our efforts. As George Will put it recently, they "knew they were defeated".

So the question is if:
1) we care more about the freedom of the Iraqi people than they do (something we could only have known in hindsight), and
2)we are not willing to wage total war until all opposition is removed,

than how can we possibly win there?

Well I think you see where I am getting at. General Sherman would probably agree with me. However since we do not have the will to fight this way, it is clear that we cannot win until that fact changes. What could bring such a change of will about? Unfortunately, I think we are victims of our own success in preventing further terrorist attacks. Until every man, woman, child, and leftist acutely feels that they are in grave danger of death at the hands of these murderers, America will not be ready to do what she must to win this war.

Until we are ready, maybe we should hold off on any further "imperialist" adventures in the world's excretory regions.

Semper Fidelis

MDP

[GOP_1900AD]

What would have been this person's reaction to day one of Iwo Jima? It's sad how soft we've become.

[Jank]

A terrorist attack on Jordan was tharwted, recently, with the potential of killing 80,000 people. How's that for
critical mass? This could happen on our soil. Personally,
I'd rather fight them over there, not here. Are you pulling
our legs?

[Arkinsaw]

Two different wars. The war to remove Saddam and the Baathists from power was won quickly and decisively.

The second war, to bring democracy to Iraq is the iffy one and one we weren't really prepared for. Its very difficult to just hand freedom and democracy over to someone on a platter. It's impossible if they don't want it and are either unwilling or apathetic about seizing the opportunity.

Bremer said as much in his latest speech. If the Iraqis do not seize the opportunity to save their country....then it won't be saved. The question is simply a matter of how patient we are and on when our time limit is.

Sooner or later we are going to have to announce that time limit. If the Iraqis don't seize their own future then we should pull back away from the cities and let them slug it out. In that event we should make clear that we are very good at removing regimes from power and putting their leaders in orange jumpsuits and would not hesitate to do that again if that regime once again became a threat to US interests or certain lines were crossed. We may not be able to determine Iraq's government, but we certainly retain a big old olive drab veto over them.

[governorjim]

Well...you did a nice job getting on here and getting some responses but your first line gives it all away.

Look, if you are starting to get wobbly (or as I assume, you never agreed with it in the first place) on Iraq, then you need to do a better job of getting informed. If you don't understand the purpose of our involvement and the incredible sacrifice of our military in this war, then the responsiblility is on you to understand the overall picture of how this lends itself to the security of the great nation of America.

Take it upon yourself to REALLY understand why we are there and the sacrifices of the greatest fighting force on the face of the earth.

[nuconvert]

How about expanding on this "Nation Building" accusation??

[anonymous_user]

First, Saddam Hussein's ego and incompetence is squarely to blame for the corruption, poverty, infrastructure, agricultural, and human rights problems in Iraq, and not our "bombing back to the stone age." If you leave out the Gulf War it's easy to come to that conclusion that he's just a poor guy picked on by the U.S.

Secondly, regarding "Founding Fathers" it's nearly impossible to create an unarmed revolt against dictator's heavily armed police state. Democracy is worth fighting and dying for, but against Saddam's regime, it would have been purely martyrdom, as it was for the 400,000 people that crossed Saddam. Yet we squirm as the body count nears 1,000 and toy with surrendering the people of Iraq to the oil-for-food thieves at the U.N. or the leftover Taliban/Al Qaeda thugs drooling over an oil-rich country they could dominate.

The Iraqi people have been given a gift of "leveling the playing field" by the U.S. Soon, they'll be able to choose to use that gift, or squander it and live in tyranny. I don't think that makes us the bad guys for offering the Iraqi people the gift of freedom and democracy.

[Sam the Sham]

Bottom line, the odds are all in the favor of those putting down the resistance/insurgency.

The first line of defense in counter insurgency warfare is a functioning civil government. The cop on the beat. Normal law enforcement. These things do not exist in Iraq. The local police forces have been intimidated into neutrality or are riddled with insurgent informers and sympathizers. What intelligence apparatus do we have in Iraq ? Do we have vast numbers of people with native fluency in Arabic who can do hearts and minds work and intelligence analysis ?

The odds are not in our favor.

[Faith-Hope]

Just what the media wants you to think!! Wait until you see ole Ted's show on ABC tonight. (Nightline) After his show airs tonight most people leaning towards your way of thinking will certainly become convinced.

[BushisTheMan]

I will admit I read your title, quickly scanned the content, and then got ticked.

You sound like John Kerry who left our military hanging by their thumbs in Vietnam.

[68skylark]

Yes, I think you and VDH do agree that people have a natural yearning to be free. So you're in good company!

Personally, I don't think people have a natural yearning to be free. I think men have a yearning to dominate everything and everyone around them. It's only with a lot of maturity, education, a supportive culture, etc, that people can learn differently. They learn that attempted domination just leads to non-stop violence, poverty, ignorance and pain. They can learn that liberty is a better option. But the process isn't natural. It's not easy. It takes a long time -- maybe decades or maybe centuries, I don't know.

Finally, I like the optimism in your last paragraph. I agree that I think Iraqis will one day realize that it's best to live in a free society, and that's it's worth making sacrafices to keep up a free society. We could be wrong, but I think it's a good effort worthy of a good country like ours.

[JaguarXKE]

More American fighting men dies during a training exercise for D-Day than have died in this entire conflict. AS many people were murdered in Chicago last year as have been killed in this entire conflict. It is horrible when any American soldier dies, but as wars go, this one is well on the low end of the casualtiy scale. The media is doing their best to make this out to be another Vietnam, but it isn't anywhere near that level. The answer is to hang tough and kill the bad guys more than they are killing us. And that's what we're doing.

[Alberta's Child]

Now you are blaming an administration that had only been in place for a few months for 9/11.

Absolutely not. I'm simply pointing out that this administration was looking to wage war in Iraq long before 9/11 -- and that 9/11 provided the political support that would have been more difficult to generate had it not occurred.

[Hegemony Cricket]

Check_My_Tagline

[Check_Your_Premises]

Sooner or later we are going to have to announce that time limit. If the Iraqis don't seize their own future then we should pull back away from the cities and let them slug it out. In that event we should make clear that we are very good at removing regimes from power and putting their leaders in orange jumpsuits and would not hesitate to do that again if that regime once again became a threat to US interests or certain lines were crossed. We may not be able to determine Iraq's government, but we certainly retain a big old olive drab veto over them.

Ok, now you make a lot of sense. This is the same approach I am leaning toward. I love the "olive drab veto" line by the way. You sir are a wordsmith.

[anonymous_user]

If Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, why did Al Qaeda bomb Spain to get their troops out Iraq?

[arjay]

Has it occurred to you that these people have been under oppression for years and are still scared to death.

Many of them will never feel free until Saddam is actually dead. They still fear his henchmen that are still left.

They have no recent history of freedom and have no idea how to handle it.

I have absolutely no doubt that we belong there and by doing so we are keeping the battle off our own shores.

[Alberta's Child]

Insurgency works well---an attempt to overthrow a government (in this case, us).

I was with you up until that inane comment. Some Iraqi who has lived in Tikrit or Fallujah for the last 25 years and who goes out and plants roadside bombs to overthrow a "government" that was not there a year ago and will not exist in 60 days may be a lot of things -- but he is hardly an "insurgent" by any stretch.

[Alberta's Child]

How about expanding on this "Nation Building" accusation?

That's exactly what is going on in Iraq today, isn't it?

[Check_Your_Premises]

Take it upon yourself to REALLY understand why we are there and the sacrifices of the greatest fighting force on the face of the earth.

I have endevoured to do so. Have you endevoured to read my post? And admittedly my title was deliberately provocative. I see now that was a mistake, instead of encouraging readership, it kept people from getting past the title.

As another poster pointed out this was really two wars. The removal of Saddam. Thumbs up there! The second is to democratize Iraq. Not so sure on that one.

I am leaning for pulling out of the cities, maintaining a sizeable force there, and holding the "olive drab veto" over whatever government materializes.

[Sam the Sham]

If Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, why did Al Qaeda bomb Spain to get their troops out Iraq?

Because where Muslims wage jihad against "infidels" be it the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, Chechnya, Sudan, Bosnia, Iraq, Kashmir, etc, al Qaeda is there in body and spirit.