What to do about Iraq?
As you may recall, I was against the war. Not because I foresaw the country collapsing into the violent chaos which it has, but because I am a student of history and I understand that war is a terrible thing. This is a fact that has escaped most modern Americans, although the Europeans for some strange reason - two massive wars on their soil may have something to do with it - seem to have finally internalized it.
So I was against the war on general moral grounds, as well as the specific grounds that the president was obviously, blatantly lying and trying to conjure up a war where none was warranted. A position which has been proven absolutely true. Not even "Remember the Maine" was as transparent and baseless a grounds for war as the "threat" Saddam posed to America with his WMDs.
But we invaded despite my disapproval. And thanks largely to jaw-dropping, astronomical incompetence on the part of the administration, a startlingly effective invasion and conquest has turned slowly into a bloody civil-war-with-the-lid-on. It's hard to exaggerate the depth of the blundering that was involved. The lack of planning. The complete refusal to make use of the competence available. The utter lack of oversight. Reconstruction budgets in the billions were being mismanaged by college students whose sole qualification was that they were ideologically pure.
I could be wrong, but I believe that had someone competent - Al Gore, for instance - been handed the situation in Iraq immediately post invasion, Iraq today would be a functional country. There was about a year there, after the invasion, when the violence was low and the Iraqis were waiting to see what would fill the vacuum left by Saddam. And nothing did, besides graft and corruption and blundering. Had we retained some of the existing power structures and de-Baathified over time, had we sent in competent people who knew the country and who knew the people, rather than inexperienced but zealous members of the Party, had we quickly created a governing structure...
No matter. All that would have required competence, which is the single largest failing of this administration.
So what now? Obviously, the bungling malefactors in charge of the situation will remain in charge, at least for two more years, so any rational discussion of options is rather moot. Even if we impeach the president - as should and would happen in any honestly governed society - and the vice-president, there's no way around the fact that one or another of the incompetents from this administration will remain in charge. And another thousand American troops will die, and another hundred thousand Iraqis.
Yet it is not, I think, a waste of time to tackle the difficult questions. To not be unprepared - that sin which has left Iraq in the situation it's in now.
So. What do I think America should do now, vis-a-vis Iraq?
The answer, I think, will surprise you.
We should reinstate the draft.
Our current enagagement with Iraq is exactly, precisely, the wrong sort. We have a force large enough to suffer continuous casualties, yet too small to actually secure the country. Although I lost every last iota of respect for Colin Powell because of his shameful shilling for the administration's march to war, nonetheless I agree with the doctrine stamped with his name. If you are going to do something, do it with all the resources at your command. Do not attempt to achieve a military objective with the least possible commmitment. Use overwhelming force.
We invaded Iraq. We broke it. We bought it. If we were to call up a million men, we could lock the country down. Confiscate every last RPG and AK-47. Keep an eye on every street corner. According to the CIA world factbook, Iraq has a population of twenty-six million. America has a population of two hundred ninety eight million. We could quite literally lock that country down. One American soldier to every twenty-six Iraqis.
This would, of course, involve Americans getting killed. More, probably, than are getting killed now, although less I suspect in the long run. But of course that's the price of invading another country.
Of course, the administration never admitted and would still deny that. A core Republican tenet is to lie, lie, and lie again about the cost of anything. They are lying right now about how much money it takes to run the federal government. That's exactly what a deficit is. It's a lie, a lie that lets their faithful believe that they can have those tax cuts and still have the government do what it promises to do. The whole Iraq war has been predicated on cost lies - lies about how much it would cost in dollars - remember "will pay for itself"? - and lies about how much it would cost in lives.
A real government wouldn't deal in those sorts of lies.
"But I thought you were a liberal", I hear. "Don't liberals want to pull out of Iraq?" And it's true, many do. And I agree with them that pulling out of Iraq would be better than the pissing away of money and lives that we are doing now. But I don't think it would be fair to the people of Iraq, whom Bush and his cronies fucked over even more than they have fucked over the people of America. I don't think it would benefit America, either having a collapsed state in the heart of the Middle East or proving that we have no stomach to finish what we start. And I don't think it would benefit the Democratic party; even though the whole clusterfuck is 100% the fault of Republicans, whoever pulls our troops out will be tarred with the brush of failure.
However, I could be wrong. Perhaps Iraq is, at this point, beyond saving. Perhaps we should just cut our losses.
So what I would do, were I President or perhaps the Speaker of the House, is to have a vote. A big, important vote. Not a plebiscite, since we don't do those, but a vote in Congress. And there would be two options:
Anyhow, that's my opinion. Raise or fold. Staying the course will be, in the long run, the most expensive option of all.
- Sun Ra