Another 5 Year Anniversary
A year and a half ago, we marked the 5 year anniversary of the September 11th attacks. The only noteworthy thing to point out then was that Osama bin Laden was still free (and still is).
Now, we're marking the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. It's long since become public knowledge that there were no WMD nor did Saddam have anything to do with 9/11 or al Qaeda. Of course, thanks to us, al Qaeda has franchise operations in Iraq. Despite the overwhelming unpopularity of the war with the public, not to mention our allies in Europe, and retired generals warning us about the strain its put on our military, repeatedly, we're still there. The Democrats have been unable to use Congressional powers, thanks to obstructionist Republicans, to end the war, let alone hold hearings as to how billions of dollars are being spent. We're closing in on 4,000 dead and over 60,000 wounded American soldiers and the collateral damage is mounting. Were it not for the amazing advances in medical care and logistics, many more of those wounded would be dead. The number of Iraqi dead is unknown. The miserable state of its bureaucracy makes it impossible to get an accurate count, but estimates range from 85,000 to 655,000 to 1.2 million. I don't think we'll ever know. The fiscal costs? Unfathomable. Even if we were to pull out today, we'll still be paying for war for decades. And if our government decides to do the honorable thing and take care of its wounded, the costs will continue that much longer.
Yet despite what's happened, W still insists that Iraq is still relevant to the War on Terror and a success.
I'll grant him that the removal of Saddam Hussein from power was a good thing. His decision to stay there is another matter. His failure to take into account Iraq's disparate ethnic groups (Kurds, Shiite, and Sunni) was profound. It took a brutal monster to keep these three from killing one another. With his death, they were free to resurrect centuries old differences and go to war with one another. It's gone from deplorable to horrendous.
Last year's surge, which is still ongoing, appears to have had some positive effect. The frequency of violence has decreased. But it comes at a price. Equipment breaks down from the undeniable wear and tear of sand, heat and IED's. Soldiers are forced to endure extended tours of duty and are then called back to the front after limited reprieves at home. Enlistment is down. Meanwhile, the Iraqi government fails to achieve any sort of political settlement among the factions.
Of the three major presidential candidates, none has called for an immediate withdrawal. Obama and Clinton talk about drawdowns over the next 6 to 18 months. McCain says we'll be there for years, perhaps a century. While we can handle something like Korea, where we're still there after 50 years, the situation is far different in Iraq. We can not maintain our current level of commitment any longer. The cost in tangibles such as lives, equipment, and dollars is too high. The intangibles, like relations with our allies, preparedness for future emergencies, the real War on Terror, and the socio-economic health of our nation are even higher.
As I write this, McCain seems to have survived the political attacks from within his own party. Democrats continue to fight with one another and may in fact self-destruct. I was fairly certain that whomever the Democrats nominate would win the general election. I've lost that certainty. Of course, I was encouraging Democrats to root for Ron Paul to win the Republican nomination, just in case they lost. But instead there's McCain, who insists that he'll perpetuate our presence in Iraq.
My neighbor is Vietnam War veteran. I have tremendous respect for him and he's a great guy. He's also a Republican. I suspect he's an Ostrich Republican as he's not like the guys you see in Congress or on Fox or hear on Right Wing Radio. On Saturday, I needed to borrow his truck. I took a short ride with him as he went to dump a load of wood chips. The subject of politics came up. When we got to McCain, he revealed that while he was serving on the USS Forrestal, John McCain was one of the pilots. So, I knew with absolute certainty who he was voting for.
I used to like McCain. But the McCain of 2008 isn't the McCain of 2000. When people say, "9/11 changed everything," they're not kidding. I can not, in good conscience, vote for this man due to his position on Iraq. So, I had to figure out a way to disagree with my neighbor without alienating him. While my liberal friends might say, "Screw him! He's a Republican!", that's a simplistic position to take. It's akin to saying, "You're with us or against us," just like the current occupant of the White House. This administration has done too good a job of alienating other countries and even our fellow Americans. It's easy to keep that mentality in the blogosphere, but I have no desire to make enemies of my neighbors.
After declaring I wouldn't vote for Clinton (True. I won't. I don't like her. I'll go 3rd party again if I have to.), I said that I had reservations about McCain because of Iraq. He brought up the "cut and run" argument but I shot it down. "After five years it's no longer a question of cutting and running. Our boys are dying over there, doing all the hard work to make some semblance of order, while the Iraqi government sits on its ass doing nothing to resolve their differences. It's time for them to stand up and fight for themselves." It must've struck a chord as he made no effort to counter what I said. We arrived at our destination and when we got back in the truck the subject was changed. Then again, maybe he was just being polite.
I wanted to end this post with something positive, but barring a miracle, or even a horrendous catastrophe, we'll be in Iraq for at least another 10 months. What lessons will we learn from this experience? Thirty years from now will be have another president that rode out a war due to privilege only to get us embroiled in another fatal endeavor? Couple the war with colossal trade deficits and a seriously troubled economy and does it all signal the beginning of the end of America as we know it? Just as the Soviet Union ended due to bankruptcy and an unpopular war, maybe we're headed there as well. I know the analogy isn't perfect. But as we won the Cold War by outspending the Soviets, we may lose everything because we've outspent ourselves.
\_/
DED
Now, we're marking the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. It's long since become public knowledge that there were no WMD nor did Saddam have anything to do with 9/11 or al Qaeda. Of course, thanks to us, al Qaeda has franchise operations in Iraq. Despite the overwhelming unpopularity of the war with the public, not to mention our allies in Europe, and retired generals warning us about the strain its put on our military, repeatedly, we're still there. The Democrats have been unable to use Congressional powers, thanks to obstructionist Republicans, to end the war, let alone hold hearings as to how billions of dollars are being spent. We're closing in on 4,000 dead and over 60,000 wounded American soldiers and the collateral damage is mounting. Were it not for the amazing advances in medical care and logistics, many more of those wounded would be dead. The number of Iraqi dead is unknown. The miserable state of its bureaucracy makes it impossible to get an accurate count, but estimates range from 85,000 to 655,000 to 1.2 million. I don't think we'll ever know. The fiscal costs? Unfathomable. Even if we were to pull out today, we'll still be paying for war for decades. And if our government decides to do the honorable thing and take care of its wounded, the costs will continue that much longer.
Yet despite what's happened, W still insists that Iraq is still relevant to the War on Terror and a success.
I'll grant him that the removal of Saddam Hussein from power was a good thing. His decision to stay there is another matter. His failure to take into account Iraq's disparate ethnic groups (Kurds, Shiite, and Sunni) was profound. It took a brutal monster to keep these three from killing one another. With his death, they were free to resurrect centuries old differences and go to war with one another. It's gone from deplorable to horrendous.
Last year's surge, which is still ongoing, appears to have had some positive effect. The frequency of violence has decreased. But it comes at a price. Equipment breaks down from the undeniable wear and tear of sand, heat and IED's. Soldiers are forced to endure extended tours of duty and are then called back to the front after limited reprieves at home. Enlistment is down. Meanwhile, the Iraqi government fails to achieve any sort of political settlement among the factions.
Of the three major presidential candidates, none has called for an immediate withdrawal. Obama and Clinton talk about drawdowns over the next 6 to 18 months. McCain says we'll be there for years, perhaps a century. While we can handle something like Korea, where we're still there after 50 years, the situation is far different in Iraq. We can not maintain our current level of commitment any longer. The cost in tangibles such as lives, equipment, and dollars is too high. The intangibles, like relations with our allies, preparedness for future emergencies, the real War on Terror, and the socio-economic health of our nation are even higher.
As I write this, McCain seems to have survived the political attacks from within his own party. Democrats continue to fight with one another and may in fact self-destruct. I was fairly certain that whomever the Democrats nominate would win the general election. I've lost that certainty. Of course, I was encouraging Democrats to root for Ron Paul to win the Republican nomination, just in case they lost. But instead there's McCain, who insists that he'll perpetuate our presence in Iraq.
My neighbor is Vietnam War veteran. I have tremendous respect for him and he's a great guy. He's also a Republican. I suspect he's an Ostrich Republican as he's not like the guys you see in Congress or on Fox or hear on Right Wing Radio. On Saturday, I needed to borrow his truck. I took a short ride with him as he went to dump a load of wood chips. The subject of politics came up. When we got to McCain, he revealed that while he was serving on the USS Forrestal, John McCain was one of the pilots. So, I knew with absolute certainty who he was voting for.
I used to like McCain. But the McCain of 2008 isn't the McCain of 2000. When people say, "9/11 changed everything," they're not kidding. I can not, in good conscience, vote for this man due to his position on Iraq. So, I had to figure out a way to disagree with my neighbor without alienating him. While my liberal friends might say, "Screw him! He's a Republican!", that's a simplistic position to take. It's akin to saying, "You're with us or against us," just like the current occupant of the White House. This administration has done too good a job of alienating other countries and even our fellow Americans. It's easy to keep that mentality in the blogosphere, but I have no desire to make enemies of my neighbors.
After declaring I wouldn't vote for Clinton (True. I won't. I don't like her. I'll go 3rd party again if I have to.), I said that I had reservations about McCain because of Iraq. He brought up the "cut and run" argument but I shot it down. "After five years it's no longer a question of cutting and running. Our boys are dying over there, doing all the hard work to make some semblance of order, while the Iraqi government sits on its ass doing nothing to resolve their differences. It's time for them to stand up and fight for themselves." It must've struck a chord as he made no effort to counter what I said. We arrived at our destination and when we got back in the truck the subject was changed. Then again, maybe he was just being polite.
I wanted to end this post with something positive, but barring a miracle, or even a horrendous catastrophe, we'll be in Iraq for at least another 10 months. What lessons will we learn from this experience? Thirty years from now will be have another president that rode out a war due to privilege only to get us embroiled in another fatal endeavor? Couple the war with colossal trade deficits and a seriously troubled economy and does it all signal the beginning of the end of America as we know it? Just as the Soviet Union ended due to bankruptcy and an unpopular war, maybe we're headed there as well. I know the analogy isn't perfect. But as we won the Cold War by outspending the Soviets, we may lose everything because we've outspent ourselves.
\_/
DED
Labels: Iraq
posted by DED at 10:05 AM
4 Comments:
But as we won the Cold War by outspending the Soviets, we may lose everything because we've outspent ourselves.
Interesting. Hadn't looked at it that way.
Of course, the costs of Vietnam and the wonderful economy of the 70s is probably the best analogy.
The Cunning Realist has used that very same analogy in his discussions about the Iraq War.
I think we'll be there a lot longer than 10 months.
Even if a Democrat wins, they've demonstrated time, and again that they have no spine when it comes to making tough decisions.
I think we'll be there a lot longer than 10 months.
I do too. If we're lucky, maybe 18 months. Two years has a chance. But, in reality, I think we're there through 2010 for the reasons you stated. The propaganda about the war is apparently stronger than all the polls showing that the majority of Americans are opposed to the war.
Someone needs to dredge up Vietnam to show how propaganda (in this case "domino theory") warped our perception then and realize that today you can go there to play golf.
Post a Comment
<< Home