If I Had Sent Kids to Die or Be Wounded in Iraq I Would have Apologized to America, and Resigned

"As I remember, in the Broadway musical 1776, a dispatch from George Washington is delivered to the Continental Congress by an exhausted courier. Following that John Adams sings a lament on a darkened stage.

Is anybody there?
Does anybody care?
Does anybody see what I see?"

I WANT TO JUMP UP AND DOWN ABOUT THE WAR IN IRAQ, AND HOW WE JUST GO ABOUT OUR BUSINESS AND LIFE AND OUR KIDS CONTINUE TO DIE AND BE BLOWN APART FAR FROM HOME ACCOMPLISHING EXACTLY WHAT?

I AM MOSTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE GIANTS PLAYOFF GAME AGAINST THE GREEN BAY PACKERS ON SUNDAY, AS WELL AS WONDERING IF TIM RUSSERT FINALY SUCCEEDS IN A "GOTCHA GAME" WITH HILARY CLINTON, OR ANYONE ELSE.

SHAME ON ME AND SHAME ON THE ELECTRONIC MEDIA FOR NOT REPORTING THIS WAR EVERY DAY IN DETAIL, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY SHAME ON OUR PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION FOR LETTING THIS WAR GO ON AND ON!

The quote is from The Wall Street Journal. The full text of the article is available on line, but my "smart ass" comments are here alone, and nowhere else.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL January 14, 2008;
"THE LESSONS OF IRAQ" by Erik Swabb:

"While the improved security situation in Iraq is changing views about the chances for success there, one common belief has remained unchanged: that the war is eroding U.S. military capabilities.

It is true that repeated deployments have caused considerable strain on service members, equipment and our ability to respond to other contingencies. These problems, however, only tell half the story. The Iraq war is also dramatically improving the military's understanding, training and capabilities in irregular warfare. Since this is the preferred method of Islamic extremists, the experience in Iraq is transforming the military into the force required to help win the Long War.

The blunders of the early years are well-known. Trained for conventional warfare, the Army and Marine Corps were unprepared for the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq. Commanders emphasized killing or capturing insurgents, not securing the population as counterinsurgency doctrine emphasizes. U.S. units were stationed on large bases and didn't develop the critical relationships with local leaders that only come from living among the people..."

By itself Swabb makes some good points. HOWEVER, without an overall "context," it seems somehow discordant, and sounds like the song lyric "It seems that I have heard this song before, it's from an old familiar score..."

A friend commenting on the Swabb article sent me an interesting context for all of this "stuff."

"I am now reading David Halberstam's book "The Best and the Brightest." The many similarities between this and Iraq disclose the problem. In Viet Nam our officers developed a new counterinsurgency manual. If you recall, they decided to get close with the native population, secure it, and to do so created "strategic hamlets" that would provide security so that the South Vietnamese, whom we purported to be protecting, would feel more secure to go about their lives and would perforce ally with us. What was not recognized was that the very presence of alien U.S. troops was a galvanizing force for the opposition Viet Minh, who had been fighting colonial imperialism for the preceding thirty years. The problem was that the government that we were supporting had no relationship with the people we were trying to protect and bring to our side. The hamlets we created were safe during daylight, but in the night would revert to their original alliance with the very forces we were fighting.

That is where we are now in Iraq. We have imposed a new government - but it is not responsive to a homogeneous population. We have altered our military tactics so that it appears more aligned with the people, but the people remain torn by the ethnic rivalries that existed before. It has not made us our friends and allies. Instead it has merely made them temporarily less hostile to us and each other. The government we have installed is no more aligned with the overall population than the government we deposed. Given this situation, General Petreus' changes have done nothing more than establish a temporary "time out" and the moment we leave the old rivalries will erupt and the instability will return. We continue to delude ourselves about the situation we face. Petreus' temporary surge was imposed for the specific purpose of allowing the establishment of a responsive government. We have already gone through the exercise of cutting off the head of the snake (Hussein,) yet we now have a new snake and it will not behave any more positively than last snake. Unless we alter it we shall be in a perpetual state of developing new counterinsurgency manuals that the military will ignore until it has no viable alternative."

When I was going to "spin" something in order to sell it to someone, I would have a tendency to leave out a few MINOR details. That is what many who sell things do.

Had I been "selling" this war and its aftermath, I would have difficulty "spinning" the sale because I would know the "minor details that I would be omitting such as:

The DEATH of 4000 of our boys and girls

The WOUNDING of 29,000 of our boys and girls

$2,400,000, 000,000 (2.4 Trillion dollars and counting)

Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties

The displacement of millions

Our reputation in the world

Our reputation with Liberals like me.

Did our President ever happen to study and take notice what went on in Vietnam more then forty years ago, or bother to inquire about the history of the Middle
East???????????

It is not possible for me to look past this needless war that we unilaterally started (please no 9/11 here) and say "whoopee, lets spend more and perhaps provoke another (but more noble war) with Iran."

NO ONE is taking responsibility for our past transgressions, but rather the President is now beating the War drums incessantly, and trying to convince America that when the itsy bitsy Iranian Boats attacked our most powerful warships, that the Iranians did in fact want to attack us. This is not a good thing.

Did the President consult with the spirit of Lyndon Johnson, and try and re-create the Gulf of Tonkin many years later.

I do "support our troops" but not the administration that sent them off to fight a non enemy and mislead, and continues to mislead ALL OF AMERICA.

As and until SOEONE like the President tells the world that we made a horrific mistake can we move forward. We (he) screwed up big time, and he pretends it never happened.

It is hard for me to forget the faces of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and others, on Television selling America on this war and LYING to us in so doing.

Norman Horowitz

A Sad, Depressed, Annoyed Bleeding Heart Liberal
Horrified that one Boy or Girl needed to die or be wounded because of this travesty yesterday, today, or tomorrow.

Comments

[DoninJoisey]

Unfortunately, this whole article requires that the president have:
Morals
A sense of accountability
Concern for others
Courage

[Ravenlea]

Well said. I have been so angry and upset for so long. I don't understand why we have not impeached Bush and Cheney, why there is no hue and cry to depose the people who have perpetrated this vile killing field not just on our children but on the people of Iraq and world community.

Why is Bush making nice with the Saudis bigger news than Wexler following up on Kucinich's call for impeachment? (Anyone who hasn't signed on can do so here and listen to his speech to the House: http://wexlerwantshearings.com/ )

How can we allow the media to pick our candidates for us? How can we sit back and not be upset - whether we like him or not - when the media silences the voice of a candidate like Dennis Kucinich - or any candidate?

And yes, I am with you in spades, how can we ignore the dead. Our own and Iraq's and those among the "coalition of the willing." How can we ignore the suffering of the people of Iraq whose lives are in many ways worse than they were before despite the removal of Saddam?

It all makes me sad and angry and frustrated and ashamed that my country is sitting back as though there is nothing to be done when there is impeachment to be done. What does it say about us that we are not taking responsibility for holding this administration to account for the invasion of another country, for torture, for violating the rights to privacy, for breaking law after law? It doesn't say anything good about us, that's for sure.

[clevelandchick]

happytrails,

You hit the nail on the head. We are not at war, we are an illegal occupying force of a sovereign nation. When we ignorantly help 'sell' this Iraq debacle by calling it a War; it allows those on the wrong side of the debate to accuse those on the right side of 'not wanting America to win'...just like they did during Vietnam.


You can win or lose a war but the truth is, all an occupying force can do is stay or leave. They aren't winning or losing anything.

Liberals, Democrats, Independents and Republicans who have wised up have got to call Iraq what it is - an occupation.

[Iceballs]

I too am an avowed Liberal. There is a man running for President who thinks as I do. He is a real Democrat not one of the cutesy imposters seeking the nomination. He was never in favor of the war. He never agreed to fund it. He has pledged to end it if elected. Yet we say things like...."He is so short." "He has big ears." "He is not an eloquent speaker." "He cannot beat those others."

If you are as frustrated as I am then get a conscience and support Dennis Kucinich. He is a real Democrat and a man of Peace.

[dexxjones]

yes but then you are not a sociopath.

[RepublicanBrain]

More anti-war outrage, and this time, with Caps Lock.

Vietnam was quite different than Iraq for the starting of the war. If you recall, elections were to be held to unify the country, South Vietnam lost, and that's how things got started. They didn't want to leave office, then there was to Gulf of Tonkin and the rest wrote itself.

Iraq, by contrast, we said had weapons. People will clamor on about "No WMDs! No WMDs!" when the actual truth of the matter was: there were, in fact, weapons. Older ones, without a doubt. Biological and chemical, but, thankfully, nothing nuclear. Saddam was also planning on getting more after the sanctions were gone. It's all in the report that was released a few years ago: It makes for good bedtime reading.

The plan on what to do with such a heterogeneous population is simple: Iraq would know more. Perhaps even divide the country into a Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd. The tensions will exist, as they always do, but with the people leaving each other alone, they'll just ignore them and move on with their lives. Dividing that country won't be easy: sea access will be necessary for all countries, but it's still doable.

Wars are not popular. However, it's not resign-worthy. People have no idea how to fight a war; their opinions on how the war is going is rather meaningless.

[siegfried]

You want to end the war, pick a president who will end it. That narrows the field to Kucinich and Paul.

[Thurber]

I totally agree. The worst part is now that the surge has supressed some of the violence, some in the media are trumpeting success. Have we really come to expect so little, that some brag about success since FEWER Americans, much less Iraqis being killed in a pointless war?

I suppose it could be considered a success in a twisted way if we could afford even financially to stay there forever. We can't. Adding to that the loss of American lives, for this pointless war, the overall cost is just too incomprehensible to understand much less calculate.

Their has been no political progress, there will be none as long as we are there. Every day we stay just adds to this immense tragedy. Thank you for pointing this out.

[WASanford]

What a great post Norman! I appreciate your outrage, I feel it too.
You quoted Eric Swabb who said "While the improved security situation in Iraq is changing views about the chances for success there, one common belief has remained unchanged: that the war is eroding U.S. military capabilities." I"m must be one of the dumb ones who just don"t get it. Could someone please explain to me just what success in Iraq is? Or even how we will know when we"ve won? It seems to me that the goal posts keep moving in this war and that there is no intention to "win." The rest of his article was little more than sophomoric gibberish about the Vietnam war.
Just the same, don"t make the mistake of believing that those of us here at home are totally escaping the ravages of this "war." It"s too easy to visualize that the two and a half trillion dollars spent so far on Iraq as just being packaged up and sent to Iraq were it"s tossed into a rat hole. That"s not the case. The Iraq war money is spent here at home. That"s not a good thing! NO commensurate increase in wealth occurs by its expenditure because the items bought with it end up in Iraq. All that"s left is the money and that money causes INFLATION. Also that money is borrowed. We have to pay off the principal and interest on those loans as well. It"s an idiot"s bargain!
This war is also keeping Iraq"s oil off the market making petroleum products more expensive.
Finally there"s the greater debt that"s owed to the brave young soldiers who we"ve sent into that quagmire. The maimed should not have to stand in line waiting to be made whole, they deserve the best care that we can give them. We should honor all of those who served us so well by doing everything possible to help them. Every night 200,000 of them sleep in doorways, under bridges, and cardboard, Just how many times do they have to sacrifice?

[Dap]

Dear Brother Norman,

Your post made me think of his, by the late Abraham Joshua Heschel - Rabbi, Humanitarian.

(from file footage, "The External Light," NBC, 1972):

"How can I pray when I have on my conscience the awareness that I am co-responsible for the death of innocent people in Vietnam? In a free society, some are guilty, all are responsible." - Rabbi Heschel


One just can't say it any better than that. Agape.

[thegulliblecitizen]

You are so right! I remember April of '68 in Company B, 1/327(the old glider battalion), 1st Bdge., 101st Air Calvary Division. We lost 34 killed from our full strength roster of about 100 men. We lost probably another 200 wounded that month. It creeps close to 300 percent casualties in one month! Remembering back, I wonder why they died? Why they lost their limbs? Why they lay waiting on LZs with their entrails cradled in their arms? It should enrage anyone with any sensitivity whatsoever! Synthetic citizens need not react! There are those who are very reactive to the millions of poor Chicanos who are scrambling for a living in our land. What bothers me greatly are the millions of official but nebulous citizens who are not really citizens at all because they never question the government for whose actions they are responsible.

From this vantage of time, I can only believe that it was for corporate profits that nearly sixty thousand young men died and hundreds of thousands were wounded. I was proud of the many fine young men that I served with and of my unit which performed wonderfully, but I point an accusing finger at those who manipulated that war and the Iraq absurdity as well! What was it all for? Lucre! Lucre! Lucre!...and nothing else!

[sparkandy]

You don't even have to be a bleeding heart liberal to abhore this war. You can be a dyed in the wool Republican, an independent, the most apolitical animal on earth, and still feel this way. Every American with any sort of conscience is totally against the slaughter of innocent Iraqis and the sacrifice of our young on the altar of profit. And, most Americans, like you, support the troops, but not the war. I was in college in Viet Nam, and that was bad enough. But this one is worse, now that I have grown children and think about all the mothers out there who have lost theirs for absolutely nothing. It's time to stop this war NOW!

[OldOne]

Good for you Norman. You are saying what needs to be said.