A question about Iraq...
-
Thanks again to you all...good to see I'm not the only person adamently conflicted.
Allen, absolutely no on both counts: and though my pride in my country doesn't run as emotional as my WWII era father's, I too am quite disappointed and more than a bit ashamed...all this was done by my leaders in my name, afterall.
I suppose if I were "The Decider" I'd do something like this:
Force the Iraq government to add a referendum to the upcoming elections asking the Iraq people what they want from us now, what they want us to do for them in the near and distant future. Force the will of these people to be heard loud and clear, once and for all.
Add a similar referendum to our upcoming elections: after giving our citizens the whole and real truth about Iraq, the current plight of its citizens, and how Iraqs themselves wish/need us to help. Force the will of our people to be heard loud and clear, once and for all.
With the will of both peoples as the guiding light, pull the UN in to chair fully transparent negotiations to determine our reparations and the conditions for our eventual complete withdrawal...hoping, of course, more of the world's nations would jump on board a peace coalition that might speed the process of our departure.
In the meantime, consolidate our forces in Iraq in a way that would maximize readiness and protection, but minimize interaction and confrontation.
Also, force a full, line-item accounting of all money spent on this war so far...every penny! Immediately confiscate the assets of any and all corporations and individuals found to have stolen even a dime, then prosecute and punish them under the auspice of war crimes.
If I were "The Decider"...?
-
I can agree with some of that, however 'IF' you were the decider you'd have one heck of a time getting the 2 parties to allow you to do all that. They're both responsible and thus will both do whatever necessary to cover their arses which would send you spiraling down in a series of investigations of investigations ad infinitum.
-
Eric, I kind of agree with you, sadly so.
Tom, the "decider" role is nice but aint gonna happen in our lifetime. As Eric says, its political. Everybody wears a flag pin (if they want to get elected apparently) but they don't make strategic decisions for the good of the country much less the global community we're supposed to be a vital part of. They make decisions for the good of the party. Ever wonder where the Clintons have come into the millions they currently have?
How can we expect to have a real referendum in Iraq? They have no real basis of choice, they've been schooled in the medrassas to hate everyone and everything we in the west think is good (not that we're the arbiters of what's good), or their leaders have been killed or they sure don't have a positive view of us or our society to say, "hey, I wanna be just like them!"
Allen
-
Of course I was being rhetorical...but things like these will need to be done before anything will be really "fixed": transparent honesty, compassionate fairness, dispassionate accountability.
(Surely I'm not the only one to remember Bush's infamous "I'm the Decider" speech? “I hear the voices and I read the front page and I hear the speculation. But I’m the decider, and I decide what’s best. And what’s best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense.” :`)
-
Well, this thread died long before I'd hoped it would...hope I didn't kill it?
Anyway, I'll close it off, I guess, by saying: I just hope the political posturing going on now isn't really going to become our foreign policy again: I pray we make quick but informed, humane, and compassionate withdrawal...this time honoring our commitments to and protecting those who befriended us throughout this folly.
-
I really feel your pain Tom and Allen. I've watched the slow destruction of the US over the past few years, from "we stand for liberty and justice" to the apologizers you've become.
You are not alone though - we Aussies feel just as responsible as we were with you from day one in Iraq. We are withdrawing our troops from Iraq but strengthening them in Afghanistan. We had to change the government to stop the fiasco, I believe you need to do the same. It's a great relief when it's finally done
believe me - you'll feel better in November when hopefully it will all be over.
-
It was over for Hungary still back in 2004 when in december, the hungarian troops (some 300 people) came back from Irak.
There are still 20 officers at the moment - mainly as advisors and trainers.
I have just read some statistics of some polling firms that when the US was about to go in there (i.e. attack Irak), less than 20% of Hungarians supported it (as well as Hungary's participation). However it wasn't some "pacific" thinking only because they supported Hungarian military medical trrops into Afghanistan or peace making (either by NATO forces or the UN) in Bosnia, Kosovo, Cyprus, Chad and elsewhere where Hungarians serve all over the world.
In reality, our government wanted to extend Hungarian presence in Irak (as per American request) but they didn't get the necessary votes in the Parliament so they had to withdraw the troops.
Obviously Hungary's military potential cannot be compared to that of the US so these 300 soldiers were more symboluic there than real forces but I'm glad that our government could not force their intention to extend the presence there against the will of the nation (and the Parliament). Epecially after things have turned out about the truth in Irak prior to the war.
-
Thanks guys, I really appreciate your candor. (John, I hope you are right about feeling better next year!) We'll see how it all shakes out soon enough.
(At least some in Congress are sorta "on top" of the subterfuge behind the negotiations of Bush's new treaty with Iraq which will replace the UN sanction...hope they can stop him from hamstringing the new administration with further embarrassment as/if they pursue the will of the people for a change.)
I finally this weekend had a chance to pose this question to my sister, the sane one among us (or at least the most nearly sane...plus, she is hardly ever overpowered by emotion during a "discussion" :`) A couple of the points she had used to calm her own moral questions about on this issue helped me as well...so I'll share (I should say, I guess, she was a "don't go" to begin with, a "why'd we do that" throughout, and remains a stanch "get out now"...much like myself):
(Funny how the right person saying the same words seems more credible.)
She is convinced even an immediate and steady pullout will take at least a year (of course), so is heartened because she equally accepts, along with the possibility of a lot of bad things, that a lot of good things can happen in a year...if good people are involved.
Considering how little the new Iraq government has done so far for the well-being of their own citizens, she wonders why our government should continue doing so much...especially at the considerable cost to our own citizens. (We had a little side conversation about the ability of the American public to step up to the plate, to rebuild our nation under similar circumstances, and what help we'd require...but it was too scary and made our brains hurt so we stopped.)
And the clincher for me, though much harder to swallow...as I am not at all educated in such, was the idea our continued presence may indeed be more harmful than our continuing protection. We've given over years to those who desperately ask us to stay, it is surely time to try giving in to those who vehemently demand we leave...since there doesn't seem to be a middle ground that is acceptable to the Iraqs.
Anyway, time will tell...?
-
well Tom - today our troops in southern Iraq pulled down the aussie flag and are starting to move out. We've had 500 troops there for the past , what is it? 5 years? amazingly we have had not one casualty in that time.
-
'Tis a wonderous feeling, I assume, John. Amen, Brother!
Advertisement