An Overview of the Iraq War and the Larger War

Well, let's see, where are we? First there was 9-11; hard to deny that that was the beginning. This outrage seemed to call for some kind of a response, so we invaded Afghanistan, and put our former buddies the Taliban--who we supported in their war against the Soviet Union--out of business. (A lot of people who oppose the Iraq War say the Afghanistan War was justified, but I'm not so sure: it wasn't Afghanistan who attacked us, and even if they were hiding Osama, the thing to do would have been to have him extradited.) Then came the Iraq War, a war totally unrelated to 9-11, though it seems that even now lots of people pretend that it is. Then, in order to distract us from the quagmire in Iraq, Bush tried to pick a fight with Iran, whose government reacted predictably, by talking tough. Then, coincidentally or not, the Israel/Lebanon conflict erupted. Far from helping to restore peace, Bush opposed a cease fire, and continued delivering missiles to Israel to make sure they wouldn't run out.

Or maybe 9-11 wasn't the beginning after all. We know the Iraq War was being planned before 9-11, and probably the concurrent crackdown on constitutional liberties as well. The Bush cabal was just waiting for a Pearl Harbor-type incident to implement its plans. Though I'm not quite convinced myself, its starting to look like some of the players in the Bush administration knew of 9-11 or even had a hand in it. Mainstream papers are taking these "conspiracy theories" more seriously now, if only to ridicule or debunk them.

Through all these smaller conflicts, unrelated as they may seem, Bush is on a "crusade"--his own ill-advised word--to force it all to coalesce and make sense: the ultimate goal is to bring about a war on Islam. He seems to be able to get away with it because most people in middle America don't have too much exposure to Islamic people. But there's a thriving Islamic community here in New York, and its members work alongside the rest of us everyday, struggling, as we all do, to make our way in this vast, daunting city. It sickens me to see these individuals targeted and demonized--even more so because if Bush can do it to them he can do it to the rest of us as well. The war abroad is one with the war on civil liberties at home.

There are parallels to be drawn with both the Cold War, and the Vietnam War. What Bush is doing seems to be an attempt to set up some form of permanent war similar to the cold war. We can see this more and more clearly in every new action of the Bush administration: everything they do is an attempt to widen the conflict. They want to keep the Iraq War small in terms of troop commitment (which limits outrage at home), but they definitely want to keep it going. And they want to drag more and more other countries into the melee.

Way back when, some people believed in the Vietnam War--misguided as we now see them to have been--and fought for their beliefs; some of the died for them. Others, equally principled, dodged the draft and protested the war. And then there were those who believed in the war, yet nonetheless dodged the draft and avoided combat through various stratagems, apparently believing that it was the business of others, perhaps less high-born and well connected, to fight and die in Vietnam. Not only George Bush, but much of his administration, falls into this third category. It's hard to avoid calling these people cowards. On the other hand, I suppose I could forgive them, save for the fact that their attitude seems to have remained unchanged over the years. They've learned nothing.

So what are the lessons to be learned? The Soviet Union collapsed when not only its people, but its leaders as well, ceased to believe in it. The Vietnam war ended for a similar reason--that is, the people and leaders of the United States stopped believing in the war--but this conclusion had to be helped along by a major offensive, the Tet Offensive, that drove home the point that the Vietnamese were quite serious about wanting us to leave their country, and weren't planning on giving up anytime soon.

Unfortunately, something like the Tet Offensive will probably have to happen in Iraq. Even more unfortunately, as in Vietnam, our leaders' response will no doubt be to escalate the conflict in the short term before they admit defeat. Neither the Iraq War nor the war on Islam is something we can ever win, and in the later case I'm not even sure of what would constitute winning.

Bush and his boys devote a considerable amount of time to perfecting their propaganda--no doubt much more than they do to military strategy. To pull out of Iraq, Bush continually reminds us, would be to "cut and run." Our only alternative, he tells us with equal frequency, is to "stay the course." And all us peaceniks have to answer him with is "quagmire," a queer sounding term that we have to go to great lengths to explain. Instead, when he says "cut and run" let's say, you mean "continue to slaughter innocent people." Seems a bit smug, I know, a bit preachy, and people don't like to hear it; it will certainly alienate and enrage a lot of trusting souls who are trying, though increasingly desperately, to feel good about their country. But as in Vietnam, the more we say it, the more it becomes commonplace, and the more it will be accepted. We are never going to be quite sleazy enough to engage Bush on his home turf of cynical lying and disingenuous propaganda, and so let's seize the ground where we're comfortable, the moral high ground of honesty, and of calling a spade a spade.

As for "staying the course," the Israeli government has it right: they expected to overwhelm the entire country of Lebanon, but when the going got tough in the southern part of that state, they "declared victory" and pulled their troops back to the border. They are smart. Bellicose, perhaps, but smart. Declare victory George, cut and run, we won't say a thing.

www.hotelchelseablog.com