-
Alan O’Day, R.I.P.
May 20, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Elijah Harper, R.I.P.
May 18, 2013 | 1 comment
-
That’s a Lot of Caca in Caracas
May 16, 2013 | 7 comments
-
Canadian PM: Keystone XL Pipeline “Absolutely Needs To Go Ahead.”
May 16, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Has Obama Done Sufficient Damage Control With The IRS?
May 15, 2013 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
I would be remiss if I didn’t take note of the official end of the War in Iraq.
Like the majority of Americans in 2003, I supported President George W. Bush’s decision to remove a murderous dictator from power in favor of giving Iraq a chance to govern itself, to be an ally of the United States and to achieve greater peace in the Middle East.
Of course, there was large opposition to invading Iraq as well as to some of the tactics deployed in the War on Terror. Interestingly, much of this opposition dissipated once Barack Obama took up residence in the White House.
Back in October, I posed a question I thought I would never ask, “Should Saddam Have Stayed in Power?” I asked the question not because of any retrospective appreciation of Saddam Hussein but rather because Iraq appears far more beholden to Iran than it does to the United States as evidenced by their support of Bashar Assad’s reign of terror in Syria. This despite the fact that Nouri al-Maliki, who lived in Syrian exile in the Saddam years, would never have touched the reigns of power if not for the efforts of the U.S. and Coalition troops. The same could be said of Iraq’s Shiite majority which was severely subjugated under Saddam. The post-Saddam Iraq also appears to be even less tolerant of Christians.
The worst case scenario would be if Iran were to launch an attack against the United States or U.S. interests with the help of the Iraqi government which result in the deaths of American civilians. If that should come to pass then the deaths of 4,487 U.S. soldiers in Iraq will have been in vain. I do not say this lightly. Of course, this doesn’t have to be. Perhaps a generation of Iraqi leaders will come to resent being in Iran’s shadow and be unwilling to do its bidding. But of course this very much remains to be seen.
It is worth noting that fewer American soldiers died during our near nine year commitment in Iraq than died during the Battle of Iwo Jima which took place in a space of just over five weeks in WWII. I’m not trivializing our men and women in uniform who gave their lives in Iraq. Far from it. What I am saying is that the American public is far less willing to endure the sort of casualties incurred in previous wars.
With that we must be mindful that we have a new generation of military veterans (who fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan) who have come back home wounded physically, psychologically and in many cases both. They richly deserve our gratitude, our support, our care and, above all else, our respect.
What I fear is that there will come a time (and it may come sooner rather than later) when we are in a far more perilous situation and because of what occurred in Iraq we will be far more hesitant to defend this country. While this hesitancy might earn us greater standing in the international community it could also cost the lives of thousands, if not millions of innocent American civilians. Our enemies are mindful of this hesitancy our increased intolerance of military casualties.
In the final analysis, things didn’t go as planned in Iraq. They seldom do in war. But in other wars, the United States attained victory and went out on its own terms. The same cannot be said for Iraq.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 12.15.11 @ 6:18PM
Personally, I'm glad the War in Iraq is over, because now I won't have to spend another summer over there, melting in the sun. I wish the Iraqis well, I really do!! And I really hope their new Government survives, and thrives after we're gone. They deserve some peace, which I don't believe they've ever had, but if I was a betting man, I'd bet against them. The odds are not in their favor for peace, which has more to do with that religion of theirs than anything else. There is "no" peace in Islam!! Will it all have been in vain? I hope not, I hope my fellow Paratroopers didn't die in vain!!
Jack in Wi.| 12.15.11 @ 6:46PM
The war isn't over yet Arron. There are still troops there until the end of the year. Then will will have 17000 hugely overpaid contractors guarding our 1 billion dollar embassy in Bagdad. My cousin, a West Point graduate, was a recruiter for Iraq contractors in 3rd world countries like Equador. He actually supplied contractor labor for the embassy.
I saw this coming in 2oo2. I went on the internet to try to stop it, even though, I didn't know how to type and hadn't written anything since college. Anyone with a brain and knowledge of this subject could see that this whole war was lies and nonsense. Hussain was a old man, with nothing left. He had been overflown constantly for years and was under inspection by arms control people. His people were starving, thanks to our inhumane sanctions. He was the balance in the neighborhood between the radical Sunni's of Saudi Arabia, and the Shias of Iran. That's why old man Bush left him there. He also was a secular Muslim who let women wear modern clothes , get an education, and drive cars. Christians were an important part of his ruling co-alition. He let them pratice their faith freely. He also let everybody have a drink and own guns. The Christians ran the liquor stores and bars. I knew we were in trouble before the war when they ran a piece that said there were 250 gun stores open in Bagdad alone.
The patriotic conservatives and libertrians who opposed this war were people like Me, Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, John Duncan, Bob Novak, General Brent Skrowcroft, and General Norm Schwartzkoph.The hall of shame who lied us into this war includes GWBush, Cheney, Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld all neocons be they Jewish, Catholic and Protestant, and almost all the controlled press who did nothing to investigate all these lies. Of course most of the Democrats were gung ho as well.
Wayne| 12.15.11 @ 7:04PM
I can attest that 57,000 US soldiers died in vain in Viet Nam.
Wayne| 12.15.11 @ 7:02PM
What do you mean the war is now over? I thought wars had battles. Tell me when was the last battle in Iraq? If the insurgency marks the continuance of a war, then tell me when did the insurgency end? If the end of the war is when the President says it is over, then tell me, when was this war declared?
It seems like a layer of mis-information upon mis-information.
Mark in LA| 12.15.11 @ 7:09PM
Let me guess:
What I fear is that there will come a time (and it may come sooner rather than later) when we are in a far more perilous situation and because of what occurred in Iraq we will be far more hesitant to defend this country.
Translation: If we don't attack Iran now, we may never and the Jews in Isreal will have to risk their own lives rather than the lives of the goys in the US.
John Bibb| 12.16.11 @ 3:42AM
***
I think that this is just the end of Act 1. Act 2 is coming on stage now--radical cleric Mookie and Iran starting a civil war to take over Iraq and it's oil fields as part of a new Iranian caliphate.
***
And if the Iraqi Military and government we set up and trained don't fight and win--then they will deserve their fate.
***
Rocketman
***