Four years ago the United States invaded Iraq employing shock and awe. We were told it was necessary because Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. He did not. It was suggested that there were substantive ties between Iraq and al-Qaida. These assertions were debunked. The final rationale for the invasion was that overthrowing Saddam’s tyranny and replacing it with a genuine democracy would change the dynamic in the Middle East and usher in a more enlightened era of peace and stability. In fact, the chaos that followed the invasion and exists to this day has squelched any real hope of a stable democracy, and now we fight mostly to keep the country that is Iraq from disintegrating.
The rationales of the Bush administration and its cheerleaders for the Iraq War have turned out to be little more than desert mirages. Four years later we are mired in deadly combat with a tough and effective Sunni insurgency whilst we simultaneously struggle to prevent open warfare between Sunnis and Shiites. We have suffered the loss of more than 3200 soldiers killed (the equivalent of almost a brigade) and 25,000 wounded (more than a full division). The Iraqis have lost 50-100,000 people killed and virtually any sense of personal security. They hate the US occupation but fear what will happen if American soldiers leave – which is pretty much how most Americans feel.
Even now we hear from Bush and the neo-conservatives that Iraq is the central front in the war on al-Qaida when the fact is that it is we who opened Iraq’s door to the terrorists, and that al-Qaida represents, at most, 5-10% of the Sunni insurgents. Meanwhile, al-Qaida and the Taliban are resurgent in the Pashtun tribal areas of Pakistan and prepare to challenge the overstretched US and NATO forces in the true central front of the war on Islamist terrorists, in southern and eastern Afghanistan.
Whether our counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq is ultimately successful or not, to pursue it means a commitment of significant American military strength for at least the next 5-10 years. In the meantime, our ground forces are degraded as people, equipment and vehicles wear out. The steady drip-drip of casualties continues like a leaky faucet.
George W Bush implores us to be patient. Condoleezza Rice says it has all been worthwhile. From that netherworld he occupies, Dick Cheney tells us we’re winning. And unless you happen to live in that alternate reality where your only sources of information are Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, you wonder how the hell we could have ended up with these blinkered, blinded and ignorant people who led us off this cliff.
I don’t understand why Americans allow their government to continue this illegal invasion.
I’m Malaysian and everyday I witness the fervent anti-American sentiment increasing.
Is this war worth it?
Is It Really A War Against Terror?
Good questions!
Thanks, NJ.
Long ago, during 911, a lot of us on the other side of the globe rushed online to offer the Americans our sympathy and support. Just 6 years later, the American government has managed to alienate the rest of the world.
The prevailing reaction is: They deserved it (911).
The terrorists are never supposed to be the heroes, but the American government, along with its British and Australian allies has managed to martyr and immortalise the wicked and ruthless Muslim fundamentalists.
Which is what makes me wonder if it was about terror in the first place. ‘Terror’ is simply the excuse for pillaging oil.
If you check out my site, you will find there are still a few who think that the Bush administration has built-up Iraq.