What's Another Five Years Among Friends?

Last week marked the 5th anniversary of the Untied States' invasion and occupation of the sovereign nation of Iraq.

Five years ago, according to Gallup polling, 75% of the country thought we were doing the right thing. That number has diminished to 39% in its most recent poll.

Republican arrogance and the Democrat'c cowardly behavior (for some it was presidential ambition), and the nation's post-9/11 fear conspired to exuberantly make the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions secondary considerations.

In exchange for perceived safety, we gave our elected leadership the benefit of the doubt. In doing so, we made perhaps the most tragic Faustian bargain in our brief history.

The rollback of civil liberties, warrantless wiretapping of its own citizens, the systematic use of torture, nearly 4,000 U.S soldiers killed, and 40,000 wounded based on a series of interchangeable justifications -- all of which were proven false within 90 days of the initial invasion.

Why has the administration done everything in its power to prohibit the release of photographs taken at Dover AFB as deceased soldier's flag-draped coffins arrive? Is this the behavior of a democratic society?

Is Col. Nathan Jessop, in A Few Good Men right? Are we unable to handle the truth?

Instead of America admitting the gravity of its mistakes, it has instead opted to pursue the rhetoric of victory -- something that is simply unattainable.

Because "The Surge" has successfully decreased the level of violence, in particular to American soldiers, Iraq has been taken off the front page. That, however, does not mean "The Surge" is working.

If one defines success by paying local militias to keep order, confining groups to their neighborhoods, unable to safely venture beyond those defined borders then mission accomplished indeed.

There is no cooperation between the Shiite-led government and the Sunnis. Meanwhile, corruption, unemployment, and the lack of basic services translate into Iraq being a failed state in waiting.

Moreover, this does not factor the economic cost to the American people. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and co-author Linda Bilmes, in their recent book, "The Three Trillion Dollar War", estimate by 2017 the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will cost U.S. taxpayers between $1.7 and $2.7 trillion.

These costs can only be estimates, in part, because the administration continues to fund the wars primarily through emergency supplemental request.

If we were making real progress in Iraq, why then must Vice President Cheney travel to Iraq undercover, while Iranian President Ahmadinejad openly arrives to a red carpet greeting?

But as I argue in my book, Strip Mall Patriotism: Moral Reflections of the Iraq War the answers to Iraq cannot be found externally. We are in dire need of reclaiming our self-reflective impulses.

The next president must change the rhetoric that narrowly defines Iraq in terms of victory and defeat. It is wrong to brazenly claim the mistakes made are in the past as if it has no relevance going forward. Not only is the past relevant, it is key toward finding a solution.

Under the existing linear rhetoric, campaign promises by Clinton and Obama to withdraw troops risk being wishful platitudes. The first step to getting out of Iraq will require a public truth.

I maintain that a Truth and Reconciliation Commission similar to that conducted by the South African government post-Apartheid is key. Grant immunity if necessary, but make uncovering the public truth about events leading up war the next administration's top priority upon taking office.

For we have dug a hole bigger than the present quagmire. Iraq is merely the most tragic example of our consistent historical amnesia about our own revolutionary origins.

Over the years, America has consistently violated its revolutionary past by supporting counter-revolutionary efforts. The path that lead America into Iraq was blazed by the support of dictators in places like Chile, Nicaragua, Columbia and South Africa.

In the case of Iraq, we didn't have a counter revolutionary force to back so we sent our own troops. At what point do we say enough? As we've already witnessed, another five years can pass in the blink of an eye.

Byron Williams is an Oakland pastor and syndicated columnist. He is the author of "Strip Mall Patriotism: Moral Reflections of the Iraq War." E-mail him at [e-mail] or go to his website, byronspeaks.com.

Read more HuffPost coverage and reaction to the fifth anniversary of the war in Iraq

Comments

[OwenScottIII]

Let's not forget the CIA-backed overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran and installation of the unforgettable Shah.

[EspritDeVoltaire]

I'd say Cheney has to crawl and hide like the snake he is for one good reason. Almost any Iraqi, regardless of their political, tribal or religious affiliation would consider him a legitimate target for execution if he was recognized. Having been a leader of a cabal which instigated the worst war crime since the invasion of Poland in 1939, I doubt he would have any chance of escaping justice at the hands of the people of Iraq if they were given the opportunity.

[ljsfolly]

Why is it a surprise for the Iranians to be welcomed openly while those of us paying for the war and all of the security that the Iraqi heads are getting be forced to enter and walk around carefully with bullseyes on everyone? It has been a known situation that we have been the dupes just paying for the ride while Iran get mass quantities of oil from Iraq. The oil supposed to pay for the rebuilding, yep it's going to Iran on the cheap while we double billed pay more and more.