I know this is an old, semi-volatile question, but it always bears asking again as time and events unfold. And I am genuinely curious for all the right reasons, as these events will impact the future of our children.
Is the current effort going to be worth it ten or 20 years from now? Can we hope for that country and it’s inept, corrupt government to ever become the next Lebanon, Turkey or Egypt?
I was and am still largely for the Iraq war. Saddam needed to go, and the UN needed to see that we don’t need them to protect our interests. The radical muslim world also needed yet another reminder that we are not to be fucked with and that their attempts to destabilize the world will not go unpunished.
But now with the internal Sunni-Shiite conflicts, serious government issues and the mounting associated costs both human and financial, will we see the intended outcome anytime soon?
How long does it take for a post-war rebuilding effort burdened with ongoing corruption, insurgency and high costs to become an unworthy endeavor?
Remember, we already have a firm presence in Afghanistan to launch strikes through out the middle east or cover Israel if need be, so how long do we hang in for the sake of doing so?
And, can this specific scenario be accurately weighed against another in the past, all factors included?
There is a recent book called “Moment of Truth” by Michael Yon. An ex-Green Beret he has spent more time embedded with troops in Iraq than any other journalist.
I’ve read his blog for a long time and he is not one to sugar coat things, but whatever my criticisms of America’s youth or my despair of what might happen in Iraq, the picture he paints of our Armed Forces gives me hope for our future.
The Iraq of 10 years from now will be largely an improvement over Saddam’s Iraq. I’m unsure how anyone could say different now that American troops are securing the peace.
I think you may run the risk of long term problems with a nation so free, that a democratic government may reflect anti-american sentiment after the war and sacrifices for their liberation are forgotten.
That is assuming the violence ever dies down to nothing. IMHO, you may see something like the Saudi-situation. An American backed govt. (although much more loosely so than the Saudi Royals) stays propped up and the country largely at peace, save for a bombing here and there targeting foreigners or other Islamic sects.
I don’t think you are going to go far comparing Iraq to Egypt or Lebanon. Iraq is completely different, and it offers a very complex set of intra-national and inter-national problems, both globally and regionally, to ever set in stone what will happen before it really goes down.
You must remember, the Iraqi people have never been free in centuries, ruled by British and their puppet states, and Saddam, their new government, assuming we get our fingers out of Iraq when the country cools down, will be a test of democracy and ethnic tension side by side. The blood bath of 2006-2007 will probably be remembered for a long time, even after the nation is at peace and may remain a point of tension for generations.
It will remain a wild card for some time, perhaps its legacy will be something of a Balkan hotbed in the Mideast for the 21st century.
Iraq is necessary in as much as Iran is and always was the endgame. The ability to control the fomenting of terrorism in not just our children’s time but into our grand children’s time, requires the stabilization of that entire region.
first Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Iran, one at a time, to provide a somewhat stable field of operations and forward bases. this is a war that will be fought over generations, not years.
Lebanon? You may want to try a better example. They’re not doing so well lately. They’re pigeonholed into the role of a proxy battleground for the rest of the Arab world v. Israel.
The Iranians will be doing their level best to ensure that Iraq doesn’t amount to much of anything. And certainly not anything in our best interests. Al Sadr and his minions will remain a fly in the ointment until we get rid of them. FWIW, I think it was a colossal FU that we didn’t close the deal on him a couple years ago.
I’m cynical of the nation building effort in Iraq. I don’t presume to imply that I have the answers but, I just don’t get that warm, fuzzy feeling when discussing it. As you said “inept, corrupt government”. Yet, we keep trying to shore them up by pouring cash into that black hole. I’m unclear as to how exactly that’s supposed to work out in the end. Maybe it’s not…? Regardless, I think that we’ll be fighting them again, or fighting Iran over them, within the next 20 years.
Understood, but they have been a prime example of what could be, a muslim government based in sanity. Iraq could only hope to enjoy the stability Lebanon has had for years until recently, and with the proper backing that sanity will resume. There is hope, but how realistic and at what cost both short-term and long-term?
Yes, Ra2bach, it is good that we have a strong middle east presence. But, where and how may be the most relevant questions yet.
The Iraqi nation will be Balkanized between the Sunni, Shiite and Kurds. The 3 factions will have enemies, alliances and conflicts with their neighbors on a permanent basis
There will be a small skirmishes between the factions, all barely held in check by a central parliamentary Gov’t and spotty national army, backed by an American Military which has better things to do.
It will not be a Democracy as we know it in the west, and will teeter on being overthrown every day till it actually is
We are looking at the slow steps to a prosperous Iraq that would never have been possible if this war had not taken place. How long will it take? Let’s just say not as long as it would have otherwise!
Yup. I totally support the war, but it has very little to do with Iraq and Iraqis and nothing to do with some grand neocon vision.
Winning the war is crucial to our integrity as a nation. Losing would be a disaster worse than Vietnam because it would cement the piss-at fatalistic attittude about global conflict held by some Americans. We have already proven that Americans can stand a war that lasts more than ten minutes. We have to show the rest of the world that we will not tap out, that we keep our commitments and that we will see it through to the conclusion.
I think the whole invasion was a bad idea. I think the argument for Iraq as a limited war was flimsy. As the first act of some scheme where we roll up Islamic governments one at a time, it shows how insanely untenable that idea is. One congressman said “We broke it, we bought it”. He is spot on. Now that we’re there, we have to win.
The world is full of dictators oppressing people who want to be free. If we want to clean out corrupt Arab governments we should start w/ the Saudis.
People argue that we should just leave Iraq.
Have we left Germany? Japan? When a country is liberated and has no decent government of its own then we HAVE to stay and as in these other countries we stay even after they are well established. A large U.S. military base will always operate in Iraq from now on.
Depends on who our next President is. If we leave, I believe it will fall apart until Iran steps in to “rescue” the Shiites. However, I don’t think any responsible President would do such a thing. We own it now, and owe it to our dead to make it free. Or at least as free as is possible in that part of the world.
The notion of installing democracy in Iraq was strategically flawed reasoning. Not only can’t it be done, but I’m dubious that it should be done. Even still the force dedicated was insufficient to that mission and we are paying the price of bad political leadership. This being the strategic consequences for withdrawl are too horrific to contemplate, but once AQ in Iraq has been silenced we really will have to step back. That has to be decisively obvious before we can go.
The “light footprint” invasion worked great for taking down a country like Iraq, but it was completely unsustainable in the extended term. Had they simply destroyed what remained of any WMD program, executed saddam, and made an offer to Saddam’s second he couldn’t refuse (either his brains or signature on a peace treaty with Israel) and said “don’t make us come back.” It might have worked.
Once they found nothing, and the political consequences became apparent Bush/Rummy decided to appeal to that old “democracy” yarn from WWII in order to justify the goof. Sadly the committed force on the ground was completely insufficient to that task.
All this does is prove the maxim that wars should not be fought by politicians.
The perfect politician would say “All right joint chiefs, this is what we want done and this is the rough time table we want it done in. You’ll get everything you need, just ask. If you can’t meet the timeline, no problem just give us some advance warning. Keep us informed, but other than that you’ve got the ball.” And that’s it.
While I enjoyed Rumsfeld busting on Europe and the media, I think he will go down as this generation’s McNamara. He had a lot of good qualities - aggressive, thought outside the box, didn’t blow around with every gust of public opinion. Problem is, he took some of these good traits to the extreme. From what I have read, he always knew more than his advisers and military leaders - not good.
The Iraqi debacle has not been worth one American life but there are those that don’t care how many Americans die for NOTHING!!! Instead of wasting all the money over seas the government should have been investing it in the infrastructure of this country. What we should have been doing instead of making war was building Oil Refineries, Nuclear Power Plants, Ethanol Plants (from switchgrass or sugarcane not corn), Drilling for oil here. Use the steam from Nuclear Power Plants to cook the Ethanol and stop wasting Natural Gas. But alas, the government will do none of this because they don’t really care about most of us long as they have there power over us and lots of money. The American people are to brain washed to do anything but sit on there hands and complain. For those of you that think wasting our money overseas is a good thing you are just as much a terrorist and threat to this country as those that attack our troops and kill innocent people. If you want a to fight and waste money go over there your self and fight and waste your money not the rest of the countries.
Easier said then done, and you think the Dems. would have let W. do that stuff? He already tried to allow the Oil Companies to build new refineries but the Dems. nixed it.
Seriously that was one of the most tedious statements I’ve ever had to read. I want my 30 seconds back.
You know I have tons of criticism for the Iraq war but that is so completely over the top that I have to suggest you are sadly misinformed.
A newspaper (and a grammar text) might be a worthwhile investment.
PS. I took my turn on the line. Did you? If not, you’ve got no standing to criticize anyone else who has an opinion on this war. If you did, my sincerest thanks, but remember our Constitution…got a little thing called the first amendment, it’s one of the reasons I served and I hope you did too. We’ve all got a right to believe what we want and to express that belief at any time, and to anyone we choose. If you don’t like to hear those beliefs…than you can choose not to listen.