The anguish of Iraq

I've been wavering over when the United States needs to ramp down its presence in Iraq. Although we both opposed the war, my husband Bruce and I both have leaned toward the "we broke it, we bought it" view that we can't pull troops out too quickly and let the nation devolve into further chaos and likely civil war. But I am starting to believe that everyone might be better served by a definite U.S. timetable of withdrawal that starts bringing our people home - and insists on more Iraqi management and participation - within months, not years.

The photo by the AP's Khalid Mohammed from Page 1 of today's Idaho Statesman (and many other papers) confirms this. How can anyone see this photo - taken yesterday at the site where 27 people -mostly children - were killed in a Baghdad suicide bombing - and not realize the mess we've made and the moral imperative we must face? Americans aren't conducting these bombing missions, of course, but our continued presence fuels the insurgency and can only lead to more scenes of carnage like this.

Of course, changing course and making definite plans for a post-occupation Iraq runs counter to the Bush mindset. The president could take a cue from John Kerry's version of the speech he should have given two weeks ago, or he could listen to Sarah Vowell, who wishes we'd once again witness a president willing to give us a good scold and prescribe bold action. But Bush is preoccupied with seeking SupCo advice from Jerry Falwell and defending the indefensible Karl Rove. Meanwhile, the anguish that is Iraq goes on and on, with no end in sight.

Comments

[Pretzel, freedom fighter cookie]

Thanks To USA for opening a AL QAEDA franchise in Iraq.
Also those republicans who claim US victims are different from terrorist victims, because US does not intend to kill innocents... Well i guess for them this guy who targeted american troops and killed 27 kids, is not a terrorists.
To me he's a terrorist as american troops are.

[Julie in Idaho]

Pretzel,

Thanks for your post. I see you are from Spain, and I respect your country for pulling out of Iraq when it did.

That Bush video on your site is really something. Sick and wonderful and way too true.

Saludos,

Julie-RSR

[Shane (Idahoan)]

To Pretzel,
That is one of the most disrespectful comments I have read in my life. "To me he's a terrorist as American troops are." You're saying that some of my good friends and family are terrorists?
As for the original post-
Americans are in no way fueling what's going on in Iraq. These people existed before the USA liberated Iraq. The only reason they can carry out these attacks is because there isn't a strong enough infrastructure and a big enough Iraqi police force to keep these terrorists underground, where they belong. I find it hysterical, interesting, and disgusting that Americans can actually try and compare terrorists to our soldiers.

[Julie in Boise]

Shane,

Thanks for posting. I respectfully disagree with you. Unfortunately, although terrorists existed before the U.S. liberated Iraq from Saddam and his thugs, they were NOT in Iraq. Iraq became a hive of international terrorism *after* the U.S. invaded. Saddam needed to go, but surely we could have gotten rid of him without flouting international law and starting a war on false pretenses.

Pretzel's comment about American troops being terrorists is over the top. I share your support for the rank-and-file troops.

The fact is, however, Bush based this war on lies. In my mind, it's not a stretch to call him a terrorist, and I'd put Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, and Wolfowitz in that category, too. They are all a bunch of crooks. We were duped.

Julie - RSR

[Shane (Idahoan)]

You are absolutely right about terrorists coming into Iraq from neighboring nations like Syria. Many on the left don't acknowledge that. But the only reason these terrorists can come into Iraq and raise hell is because, as I mentioned before, the infrastructure is no long there. They feel that since we are closer to them and that Saddam no longer has a strangle hold on Iraq they can come in easily and fight.
I hope you don't mind me being a regular reader and occasional poster here. It's good to hear the other side especially when it's another Idahoan.

As for Bush basing the war on lies....well, you can say that but you have to remember that is a partisan opinion. Many, such as me, do not believe that. I believe Saddam did have WMD's and he had to be taken out of power, too many were dying under his sword.

[Julie in Boise]

Shane,

Of course I don't mind your posting here. It's important to hear and read different views. Too many people stay in the echo chamber of whatever source of news they most trust, be it Fox or NPR. Thanks for your comments.

Julie - RSR

[Pretzel, freedom fighter cookie]

Shane,
it was me a non american who compared terrorists to US troops.I'm sorry if it sounded disrespectul to you.In my opinion lying to your people to go war is more disrespectful though.

"You're saying that some of my good friends and family are terrorists? " My answer is Yes. And i bet Islamic terrorists have friends too that are not involved in terror acts.
Ain't Shock and Awe synonims of terror ?Who made Operation Shock and Awe Possible ? In My Opinion most republicans have the Fundamental Attribution Error Disease ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error)

I agree on one thing with you. Terrorists of the world go to Iraq for "american hunting". Every two and a half months, Iraqis suffer a 9/11 (agregate number of victims of terror attacks).
So to stop terrorists to go into Iraq to target American Soldiers i propose to send Minuteman Project guys to border patrol Iraqi Borders.

Saddam had to be taken out of power when that action would bring more benefits than inaction. That is Saddam should have been toppled when he was killing kurds. TODAY US action only added more deads to the toll. If you are honest with yourself you will admit that kicking out Saddam Saved No lives nowadays, and Killed tens of thousands.
Sorry about my english.

[Shane (Idahoan)]

Pretzel,
Sorry about my slow reaction, I was spending some quality time in McCall, Idaho.

This is a little off-topic from the original post made by RSR but I guess it’s all still connected so I’ll go with it. You must understand that what liberals claim was, “lying to our people to go to war…” is an opinion. Many here do not see it as lies. Many support the war and I’d go as far as saying the majority do support the war. I don’t go by the Gallup polls, I go by the election where Americans re-elected Bush, therefore showing their support for the continued War on Terror. You cannot base accusations like comparing our troops to “terrorists” on emotion filled opinions that gets you nowhere.

Shock and Awe, synonyms of terror? Shock and Awe was a basic military procedure. Would you like to say that the allies committed work in World War 2 was terrorism? The answer is no. War is war. Blowing up a commercial building based solely on the purpose of “killing infidels” is in no way related to a military procedure that aims enemy combatants, get real.

I don’t propose sending Minute Men do the borders to protect Iraq. I propose that the American left and European left support America’s continued fight in Iraq and protection of life by helping out with the effort. So far the only countries in the long fight are the United States, Great Britain, and Iraq. Average Iraqi police personnel are doing more work than all of Europe combined at the moment, that’s pretty sad. You’re right; Saddam SHOULD have been ousted when murdering thousands of Kurds. But he wasn’t, and we must live with that. Right now we must focus on our duties to protect America at all costs. Saddam was a danger to this country, and that is why Bush and the legislature, mind you, supported Operation Iraqi Freedom. Any actions causes a death toll, as I said earlier, “War is war”, people are going to die. That is inevitable. Booting Saddam from his tyrannical and murderous power position in Iraq saved a countless number of lives. Mass graves were still being filled and rape rooms were still being constructed. Saddam still had the capability and the resources to fund and arm terrorists who wished death on the western way of life, that is fact and to deny it would make you incompetent.

Your English is just fine, it’s a pleasure chatting with you.

[Pretzel]

Very nice Shane.
You start by pointing out that "lying to our people to go to war" is not a fact but an opinion... to later say "Right now we must focus on our duties to protect America at all costs. Saddam was a danger to this country" So that's not an opinion? Saddam wasn't a danger not even for its neighbours, and thus they oposed the war on iraq. I'll tell you what the danger for your country, for UK, and maybe for my country is: Arabia Saudi and Pakistan,your buddies, core of religious fundamentalists that harbor terrorists. Iraq is not part of War on Terror. But anyway in case it is, we see how this action increased terror worldwide.
As i said I disagree the war on Iraq saved lives, as he wasn't killing tens of thousands in the last years.
Finally, I would like to point out how easily you say "war is war, people are going to die" and still support it. That's easy to say when the war and the bombs explode overseas. Ignorance is very daring.
I hope you never live a blitzkrieg, but i am sure if you or your society had experienced a war on your soil (not in the 1800's), you would not just say "war is war, people dies" and keep backing war.

[Shane (Idahoan)]

You don't think Saddam was a danger to this country? I think most of the surrounding countries are too. He had the resources and power to fund and arm terrorists that wanted to kill westerners, how is that safe for the United States?

Would you like us to invade Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? I don't think so, we have to pick our battles. I would throw Iran in there as a rouge nation. The thought with Iraq was, and still is, to provide a beacon of democracy in the middle east that will hopefully spread. Look at what happened with Lebanon, its the start of a long process.

By the way, don't try and put me with the Bush administration in saying the Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are my "buddies", they aren't. But every administration in the last 40 years has been pretty close with Saudi Arabia especially.

Upon conservative estimates Saddam has been responsible for roughly 1 million deaths. Is that not a problem? Is he fit for power? We already know he'll kill. Remember the large cannon he was trying to build to attack Israel? He wasn't a dictator to be taken lightly, he's a clone of Hitler.

Listen, I'm not going to play fantasy games and tell people that war is a cakewalk and it's fun. I'm honest. War is war, people die. But hopefully what we are fighting for can overcome that in time, that's the goal for all wars. That's just the point pretzel, I would much rather have the bombs exploding over seas than at my front door. THAT IS THE POINT.

Remember World War 2, we've had war on our soil. Pearl Harbor, Fu-go Air Bombs, and Alaska and the Aleutians. Although Alaska and Hawaii were not states at the time they were American owned territories. The goal of Americans is the take the battle elsewhere. Of course I support war at times. We cannot allow rouge nations that are terrorist friendly to be active. Especially in a post 9-11 world.