What Will Happen if We Leave Iraq?
There is a lot of static on the dial right now about us being in Iraq. Invectives being tossed around, but I am not sure if there's a great deal of thinking behind them... Emotions, yes.
The Intelligence was flawed, Not just US Intelligence. We all know that. That Bush manipulated it to enable us to go to war? Not likely. But even if he did, what's the point? We're there! We toppled the most ruthless dictator since Adolph Hitler.
And now we need to stay and finish the job. It could take a while, too. Maybe five, maybe ten years. Not for the faint of heart. Maybe Bush should have laid the groundwork better on that score, I don't know. There are plenty of critics around, but with almost no exception, they seem to be long on criticism and short on quality ideas for better alternatives and real leadership.
If we leave Iraq now, or even in the next year, there is a real likelihood of a civil war; the kind that could draw, at the least, Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia in, either as sponsors or possibly as active participants.
Iran, which is currently on the brink of being a terrorist nuclear state with publicly espoused policies of wanting to destroy Israel and the Jewish state, would be vastly emboldened.
It is quite possible that some currently moderate Middle Eastern governments could become more radical. It is likely that the Palestinians could renew their intifada against Israel. Hamas is up for election soon. Not "good timing".
We will have managed to take most of Al Qaeda from far-off, impoverished Afghanistan and Pakistan, to centrally-located, oil-rich Iraq and provided them with a carte-blanche rationale to build a Middle East launching-pad of global destruction the likes of which 9-11 pales to by comparison. Do you like Al Zarqawi? If we get out of Iraq now, you just voted for him, pal!
It isn't beyond my imagination to envision Al Qaeda with its own oil reserves. The US position in the world would be badly damaged and our efforts to gain a grip on global terrorism would be set back by a decade.
But, we need to get out of Iraq when the job is done properly, not because George Bush "Lied" or because some American troops are dying, or an election is coming up. This was our initial goal, and it hasn't changed. We were in Japan and Germany for many, many years after the war. It took a very long time. They are now solid Democratic allies.
We can do the same with Iraq, and set the tone for a more peaceful world in the future. We can do it. But, we have to have conviction and patience. We can't just "bail out" in mid stream as in Vietnam or the Bay of Pigs; this spells disaster.
Too expensive, you say? Nope. No price for Democracy is too high. Sell me War Bonds, I'll buy them. Do it more efficiently? Waste less money? Sure, I'm for that.
It's easy and its understandable for people to get all hopped up by emotions. The media is showing us this every day. They don't report the progress or the good news; it doesn't sell commercials very well.
When I was a little nerdy kid in high school I learned one lesson well: If you don't learn to stand up to bullies, you're TOAST. Al-Queda, Iraqi Insurgents, Iran, N. Korea -- they are all just bullies.
It's only if we are weak, lose our resolve, and back down, that they win. Democracy works. And illogical though it may seem, sometimes you have to get involved in a war to bring peace. Humans have been fighting for 45,000 years. When you sit down in a restaurant for lunch, don't you realize that subconciously you still "scan the horizon" for enemies? It's in your genes, you cannot change the human condition.
You can "Bash Bush" until your face turns blue. But until you can come up with a clear path and a detailed strategy that's actually better than what we have now, I suggest you shut up, and go back off and think.
The world has changed since 9-11. There are bad people who have no sense of morals or humanity, and who want you dead. You cannot appease or negotiate with maniacs who are willing to die to see you dead because they believe they will go to Heaven and have eternal life. The only thing you can do is track them down, and kill them before they have a chance.
If we leave Iraq, we are doing the exact opposite. We are telling them, "we give up, you win". Do you think they'll be "good guys" and stop? Better think again. The US Military recently found a letter from one of the top Al-Queda leaders telling his people exactly what to do when the "Americans leave". They have been just waiting for us to give up and get out of there to put their plans into place.
Somebody needs to analyze all the facts and the scenarios, and present them to the American people in a non - threatening way that they can understand. Because if we don't get our collective shit together and take care of business, painful though it may be, we very well may be dead.
What did Lincoln say?
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged." --Abraham Lincoln
The Intelligence was flawed, Not just US Intelligence. We all know that. That Bush manipulated it to enable us to go to war? Not likely. But even if he did, what's the point? We're there! We toppled the most ruthless dictator since Adolph Hitler.
And now we need to stay and finish the job. It could take a while, too. Maybe five, maybe ten years. Not for the faint of heart. Maybe Bush should have laid the groundwork better on that score, I don't know. There are plenty of critics around, but with almost no exception, they seem to be long on criticism and short on quality ideas for better alternatives and real leadership.
If we leave Iraq now, or even in the next year, there is a real likelihood of a civil war; the kind that could draw, at the least, Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia in, either as sponsors or possibly as active participants.
Iran, which is currently on the brink of being a terrorist nuclear state with publicly espoused policies of wanting to destroy Israel and the Jewish state, would be vastly emboldened.
It is quite possible that some currently moderate Middle Eastern governments could become more radical. It is likely that the Palestinians could renew their intifada against Israel. Hamas is up for election soon. Not "good timing".
We will have managed to take most of Al Qaeda from far-off, impoverished Afghanistan and Pakistan, to centrally-located, oil-rich Iraq and provided them with a carte-blanche rationale to build a Middle East launching-pad of global destruction the likes of which 9-11 pales to by comparison. Do you like Al Zarqawi? If we get out of Iraq now, you just voted for him, pal!
It isn't beyond my imagination to envision Al Qaeda with its own oil reserves. The US position in the world would be badly damaged and our efforts to gain a grip on global terrorism would be set back by a decade.
If you think we need to get out of Iraq, I agree with you.
But, we need to get out of Iraq when the job is done properly, not because George Bush "Lied" or because some American troops are dying, or an election is coming up. This was our initial goal, and it hasn't changed. We were in Japan and Germany for many, many years after the war. It took a very long time. They are now solid Democratic allies.
We can do the same with Iraq, and set the tone for a more peaceful world in the future. We can do it. But, we have to have conviction and patience. We can't just "bail out" in mid stream as in Vietnam or the Bay of Pigs; this spells disaster.
Too expensive, you say? Nope. No price for Democracy is too high. Sell me War Bonds, I'll buy them. Do it more efficiently? Waste less money? Sure, I'm for that.
BUT GET THE JOB DONE, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES.
It's easy and its understandable for people to get all hopped up by emotions. The media is showing us this every day. They don't report the progress or the good news; it doesn't sell commercials very well.
When I was a little nerdy kid in high school I learned one lesson well: If you don't learn to stand up to bullies, you're TOAST. Al-Queda, Iraqi Insurgents, Iran, N. Korea -- they are all just bullies.
It's only if we are weak, lose our resolve, and back down, that they win. Democracy works. And illogical though it may seem, sometimes you have to get involved in a war to bring peace. Humans have been fighting for 45,000 years. When you sit down in a restaurant for lunch, don't you realize that subconciously you still "scan the horizon" for enemies? It's in your genes, you cannot change the human condition.
You can "Bash Bush" until your face turns blue. But until you can come up with a clear path and a detailed strategy that's actually better than what we have now, I suggest you shut up, and go back off and think.
The world has changed since 9-11. There are bad people who have no sense of morals or humanity, and who want you dead. You cannot appease or negotiate with maniacs who are willing to die to see you dead because they believe they will go to Heaven and have eternal life. The only thing you can do is track them down, and kill them before they have a chance.
If we leave Iraq, we are doing the exact opposite. We are telling them, "we give up, you win". Do you think they'll be "good guys" and stop? Better think again. The US Military recently found a letter from one of the top Al-Queda leaders telling his people exactly what to do when the "Americans leave". They have been just waiting for us to give up and get out of there to put their plans into place.
Somebody needs to analyze all the facts and the scenarios, and present them to the American people in a non - threatening way that they can understand. Because if we don't get our collective shit together and take care of business, painful though it may be, we very well may be dead.
What did Lincoln say?
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged." --Abraham Lincoln
Maybe those who "lied" and made so many mistakes along the way should "delegate" a portion of responsibility for decision making to professionals, rather than decide on impulse behind the closed doors.
ReplyDeleteImagine a web site is not working properly in a web-based company. Should non-technical CEO try to fix it himself, or with the staff that created the original non-working site, or call for help professionals like you?
Not everyone may agree with your assumptions that people lied and that decisions were all make on impulse and behind closed doors, but otherwise your point is well-taken.
ReplyDelete"The world has changed since 9-11."
ReplyDeleteThis is a US politician's tagline - about the same stuff as the Australian government's assertion that previous prime ministers and defence leaders and experts in the field (who disagree with just about everything they are doing) are 'decrepid old has-beens who should keep their opinion to themselves'.
The world hasn't changed since Sept 11 (except for politicians using it as an excuse to do some outrageous things) - perhaps it seems that way from the US perpective because (inevitably) what was going on in the rest of the world for a long time finally arrived 'at home'.
"There are bad people who have no sense of morals or humanity" - and some of them are very close to home - Guantano bay, torture and humiliation of prisoners, indefinate detention of refugees in the Australian outback, shooting innocent train passengers on site without cause or warning, etc, etc.
While hearing what you say, I think all of us need to be very careful about trying to view all sides of the issue. Patriotism is probably one of the most dangerous forces on earth at this time, alongside religious fundamentalism, as it is about the same thing - placing ideals and allegiances higher than truth, reality, and morals.
Interesting... In your list of horrible things the U.S. does (some can only be allegations as you have no proof), you neglected to mention the following:
ReplyDeletechop of heads of innocent people
purposely target weddings
purposely target civilian trains
that serve no military purpose
kidnap and murder people
bomb hotels of the news media
fly airplanes into civilian buildings with no military purpose
hijack planes
hijack ships
blow up civilian restaurants with no military purpose
blow civilian buses with no military purpose
Seems odd that you would have left these out. Ooops, I forgot. We didn't do those things. The terrorists did.
"The world hasn't changed since Sept 11 (except for politicians using it as an excuse to do some outrageous things) - perhaps it seems that way from the US perpective because (inevitably) what was going on in the rest of the world for a long time finally arrived 'at home'."
ReplyDelete-- Well, certainly; that's human nature. US stayed out of WWII until it was obvious Hitler had completely run over both Eastern and western Europe and was about to blow the UK to smithereens.
-----------------------
"There are bad people who have no sense of morals or humanity" - and some of them are very close to home - Guantano bay, torture and humiliation of prisoners, indefinate detention of refugees in the Australian outback, shooting innocent train passengers on site without cause or warning, etc, etc.
-- I don't know how to respond to this other than to muse that Australia has far left wing Liberals just like the US. Thanks for reading my UnBlog.
You need to go and stay in Iraq (not in hotel) or Palestine home. Your thinking is "the end justify the mean" just like terrorist. Democracy allows one to defend herself in the court of law. You just assume people are terrorist somewhere in the future.
ReplyDeleteOf course you didnt lose your father mother daughters, sons, home, job, toilet, electricity; so you are in comfortable position to comment.
When other nation babies, mothers daughters and sons die, it is called casualties of war or price for democracy.
Still cant get it? Next time if your neighbor commit a crime, asked someone to flattened your house while your love ones still in it. Thats what happened to most of "the casualties of war" created by American policy. Please. end any war ASAP. Elect GOOD negotiators. ps. Dont just watch a few minutes of news. Go there and experience it yourself. Or I suggest, try live for 1 year without electricity, money, tap water (go find water in river), toilet, job, love one (no phonecalls ok). Just get "food aid" err I mean borrow or beg for food. When someone asks you, just say it is for the price of democracy.
You'll change.
"Democracy allows one to defend herself in the court of law"
ReplyDeleteUh, who's court???
The conditions in other countries
is not our fault. We are not responsible for the actions of other people's our governments.
Yes, we are responsible for helping Israel defend itself against its neighbor states and
terrorism in general.
Stop bombing their citizens and see how fast those homes stop coming down.
History shows that a people are only free for as long as they can defend that freedom with overwhelming force.
Defending freedom in court is just naive...
Negotiate with Bin Laden? Uh, right...
Negotiate with Yaser Arafat? Uh, right...
Let us know when you return to reality.
That said, you have no idea of what
anyone else's suffering direct or via their families is. So, get off your high horse.
You start out simply with the premise that no matter how we got into Iraq, we now have to deal with it. We need to finish what was started.
ReplyDeleteI'll agree.
But we need to deal with those that made the mistake of putting us into this position.
The administration needs to be cleared out. They have shown their flaws, they cannot fix them, they need to be removed.
Impeachment would be preferred - though waiting until the next election will allow a thorough steeping in the pain that we'll need to endure as a result of the current administration's misguided decisions.
RE: Impeachment:
ReplyDeleteThe post, as you correctly noted, is about finishing what we started. Dealing with the possible transgressions of the Administration is a separate issue. Pundits who talk "impeachment" like this are misguided IMHO, since efforts to move the focus away from the task at hand (finishing the job properly) will simply diffuse both paths to the point where we're left with a total breakdown. We have enough lack of communications in Congress with Bush Bashing responded to with Administrivia-Speak. Once we've left the Iraqis in a position where they can decide how to take care of it and leave, there'll be plenty of time for "impeachment" proceedings.
Right on Peter!
ReplyDeleteA Military Perspective on Iraq
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with your premise, that we need to develop both a strategy and tactics that will secure a safer world (big picture), I also believe we need to do a post-mortem on the war itself (not the police action we’re currently in) to understand how to achieve this goal.
We have some very good strategists in the military, and some did have the foresight predict the civil unrest after the war ended, and that it could turn into an active resistance. I remember watching CSPAN while General Eric K. Shinseki’s briefed congress we would need more troops at the ceasing of war than were needed for the war itself. Shinseki was the Army Chief of Staff and I think many should agree with his points about how the military needs to change from it’s cold war footing, (see the future war : http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/future/interviews/shinseki.html)
This was because, in his experience (in Bosnia), once the lid was off the pressure cooker of a dysfunctional state, you needed a capable policing force to establish order before the explosion of tensions released condenses into organized resistance. For this opinion Shinseki was pushed out by the current civilian bureaucrats running the Pentagon. Other line officers also got the point, if they had opinions other than the ones given to them in briefings, they had better keep them to themselves, or their carriers could be at stake.
While it is true the military is, as they say in cadet school, “a Dictatorship charged with protecting a Democracy.” Sometimes it’s not the military that is wrong, as we seem to have been conditioned to think after Vietnam, but the civilians who are overseeing the military.
As we look at the 21 century, we are probably looking at multiple states acquiring the capability to enrich uranium with centrifuges. This requires no easily detected reactors, and the HEU produced is much easier to handle than plutonium (I’m not going to discuss how easy). Look at Pakistan, we found out they were enriching uranium when they detonated a bomb just to show India they to could “wield a big stick.” It almost caused a hot war between them in the late 90’s.
This brings me to my point, deterrence is a useful tactic, but we must assume that it will fail sometimes. Unfortunately, deterrence is the only card we are playing. We will need informants in this war also (i.e. old fashioned spies, not just signal intercepts). To do this we must play better with the Arabs and Persians who are not inclined to live in a state as Al Qaeda would remake it (and there are more of them than you might think).
In a War, the best propaganda is that based on something the people inclined to side with you believe, because they’re experience justifies their beliefs. Case in point, what the Soviet Block people heard from Moscow did not match their experiences in real life. Some assisted the West just for the possibility that Democracy would be better (now some yearn for the ‘bad old days’ when life was predictably cruel).
Reliable informants can be more useful than an entire division of troops sometimes. And reliable informants are nurtured, as we did in the Cold War, on the milk of propaganda based on their experiences. We have been woefully inadequate in this so far. And don’t blame the press for this; a good propaganda campaign expects bad press, and plans for it by planting the seeds of actual experiences that can ameliorate the inevitable bad news. (The Soviets made this easy for us). Unfortunately, the status quo in Iraq currently does not make this easy (and let’s please not go into things are better than they appear, to sy ops how they appear is how things are. That is your hand dealt, play it or fold. And a press that is demonstrably free is one of the best assets of sy ops. That’s why the Soviet media was a paper tiger in the propaganda war.
There will come a time when we have to make a bold, clean break with our current state of affairs in Iraq to break the stalemate and our losing the propaganda war. And it will require follow through, not just bills passed outlawing torture that are fought by the other ideological side. (You just lost most of the value of this as propaganda because you have contradicted your countries image in public.) You must weigh the cost of losing some possible (questionable) intelligence from course nets to sweep up leads, to the future benefit of more reliable and useful intelligence. This is a war, and sometimes you have to make tradeoffs tactically to reach the strategic goal. If we continue on the current path, we will certainly lose opportunities for greater intelligence that will be reliable and useful for deterrence.
Lastly, the civilian military planners need to study the strategic lessons from Vietnam and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The ability to occupy a country does not necessarily lead to favorable strategic results. The Viet Cong never won decisive battle (against the US, the French are an exception). Yet they waited us out, and took control in the end. You can argue this is a reason for us to stay, and there is some merit in this argument. But look at Vietnam now; they currently look to us as a market for their goods and as a foil against the Chinese military. (The Vietnamese have fought for the Chinese for the last 1,000 years on occasions, compared to that, we were just a single recent chapter in their history.)
The Iraqis have plenty of history to counter this unfortunate episode if we get out of the way. Iran of course sees Iraq as a puppet state, and in many arenas in Iraq they have the upper hand. But Iraqis did recently fight a very bloody war against Iran. The British were there under colonial auspices for much longer than us, and as I understand, Iraqis have a passed down a distrust of anything that resembles colonialism.
There was equal merit to congressman Murtha’s suggestion to attempt to move active forces ‘over the horizon.’ If we had done this gradually, preferably with blue helmets (UN peace keepers) filling the void, eventually as a trip wire, we might have been able to begin to make that break in the status quo. And before you argue against trip wire force like blue helmets, remember our forces in South Korea are trip wire forces. If a hot war were to start, they will only be an effective fighting force for about a week, and losses will be high. That buys the time needed to bring further tactical and strategic assets online and determine targets.
So we have lost the opportunity in Murtha’s suggestion to make a useful tactical change on the battle field by taking a valid option off the table in a very public way and making it propaganda for the enemy.
Until we make some shift in the status quo, we will continue to lose ground in the heart and minds war. And it is that battlefield which, in the end, that will determine if Iraq is an ally or enemy of the United States and the West in general. Remember Vietnam, battles are fleeting, memories last for generations.
p.s. Kudos on your Web Browser code.
Correction: The Vietnamese have fought - against - the Chinese for the last 1,000 years on occasions, compared to that, we were just a single recent chapter in their history.
ReplyDeleteI apologize, it’s late for me to be coding and thinking.
“Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale & undermine the military are saboteurs & should be arrested, exiled, or hanged.” - President Abraham Lincoln
ReplyDeleteLincoln never said this. Ever. This quote is a fabrication of Dr. J. Michael Waller, a long time Republican pundit, who first wrote it in a Moonie publication, Insight Magazine on December 23, 2003 shortly before the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth gave it life in 2004.
I have two original King & Baird pamphlets in my collection, the identical pamphlet Waller sites as his proof, “TRUTH FROM AN HONEST MAN”. Lincoln never wrote anything like this … here, or anywhere else.
How pathetic has the Republican Party become that it insults the reputation of America’s finest Republican president for their political gain?
Cliff Hancuff
The World of Journalism Is Flat, Too
Cliff,
ReplyDeleteHave you started a website yet to expose this cheap-shot Republican backed hoax?
It's obvious you don't agree with the content of the post. Even if Lincoln wasn't responsible for the quote, the meaning doesn't change one iota.
The US needs to keep a presence in the Middle East indefinitely.
ReplyDeleteOne important reason is Israel.
Another reason is to keep Al Qaida from gaining a stronger foothold there.
Pretending to know all the reasons why the US should leave Iraq just shows how really little intelligence you know.
Real conflict does not end as quickly as you see in the movies or a one hour TV program.