Five Years and Counting: A Call to Pundits and Politicians to Deepen the Conversation

On this, the fifth anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq War, it is critical that we heed the words of Albert Einstein: "The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them."

For over a year, public dialogue about this war has revolved almost exclusively around exit strategy timetables and levels of insurgent violence. Should we stay one year or 100? Are there fewer car bombs this month or last?

Exit strategies and indiscriminate violence must be considered, no doubt. But too often public debate on the Iraq War seems to dwell, in Einstein's words, on the level that created it. A level at which fear dominates and those at the margins of our society -- women, low-income people, people of color and youth -- are at best, excluded from decision-making processes and, at worst, disproportionately affected by the consequences of war.

As we enter into our sixth year in Iraq, we must elevate our thinking to a level beyond fear and its necessary corollaries -- racism, misogyny and economic injustice -- to a place where strategy is not owned by the military alone, but is informed by those who should have had a say all along. And we must deepen our thinking to carefully consider the implications of enduring war and occupation on the lives of women, youth and low-income families at home and abroad.

Just look at the state of our nation today. We claim to defend women's human rights, while violating them repeatedly in Iraq and back home. We are in the throes of an economic crisis fueled by trillions of dollars we have spent on a failing war abroad.

So, five years since the start of the war, and in the midst of an election year, what kinds of questions should we be asking? And to whom should we be listening?

For starters, the experiences of women whose partners have returned from violence abroad to inflict violence at home, as well as those of women who have reported widespread sexual assault within the military and private security firms, should inform policy decisions that will guarantee the protection of women's rights-and lives. (Alarmingly, The New York Times reports that, since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, there have been 150 cases of fatal domestic violence or child abuse involving U.S. service members and new veterans.) Likewise, economic policy and military budgets should reflect the needs of a low-income, single parent -- and so many others like her -- who is struggling to support her family, while any hope of relief is siphoned away for a war with no end.

Our increasing interdependence on each other and with the rest of the world demands an approach guided by a vision of a just and inclusive democracy that invites the perspectives and participation of those traditionally excluded from centers of power -- including women. Those who are also, not surprisingly, most impacted by war.

In this vein, the media must cover the broader impact of the Iraq war on those most at risk: the woman in Iraq who is afraid to leave her house for water for fear of being kidnapped, the wife of a veteran who sports the bruises of both her husband's anger and the country's callous treatment of young, often low-income men of color in this country who are recruited into the military with cash cards and free lunches.

Similarly, our political leaders must engage in a more comprehensive conversation about Iraq, including the inextricable links between a failing war and a failing economy. In particular, they must take a good, hard look at the real economic fall-out in this country -- the trillions spent while so many are struggling to keep their homes, pay exorbitant medical bills, afford school, or just the next meal.

And finally, I and many other social justice advocates nationwide are still waiting for our presidential candidates to inspire us with a vision that will prevent us from returning to this violent, seemingly intractable place. To this end, we want them to articulate a new level of systemic understanding that acknowledges the connections between war and racism, misogyny and economic inequality. We want them to ensure an exit from Iraq that protects the rights and livelihoods of those made disproportionately less secure by war. And we want to be sure that they will incorporate the lived experiences of people across the spectrum of race, class and gender into their platforms and policies during this election season and beyond.

Our democracy, and the rest of the world, depend on it.

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

Comments

[SamThornton]

Unfortunately, there are many circumstances that mitigate against a "more comprehensive conversation" which can't simply be wished away.

One circumstance has to do with the structure of our political system. The party system doesn't currently respond to desires of the electorate in any meaningful way, if it ever did. Witness the inaction of the Democratic Congressional majority since the 2006 election. The parties have become more an association of career politicians and wealthy supporters who perform favors for each other. Elections serve only as referenda on meaningless wedge issues which are never resolved. The press has been successfully reduced to a collection of sycophants dependent on the business leg of the political structure. None of the players in this street theater have the slightest incentive to change. They're all getting fat off it.

Other than that, nothing wrong with conversation. Just keep in mind that the winks and the nudges will speak more loudly than words.

[VillyVal]

I have done my part by thoroughly testing the hypothesis that homo sap can be chastised into improved cognitive functioning. It doesn't work. Maybe our species is just 10 or 15 IQ points short of meaningful public discussion ... the sort that would compel the pundits and politicians to hew to a higher standard.... Instead they are rewarded by high ratings when they pitch their spiel to the lowest common denominator.

And yeah. What about the Iraq speech? I was expecting it to be all over everywhere.

[darker]

You cannot pay Pund-Idiots and Polit-ITCH-ans enough to take anything seriously --other than
their own corruption and profiteering off USA Public.

[StephenSmoliar]

That's a good way of putting it, but it is not just about the pay. Having a job at all depends on reducing the deepest complexity to its simplest terms; and (no surprise) that is true of BOTH politicians and pundits. You cannot succeed in either position if you subscribe to H. L. Mencken's famous precept ("For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.")! If you want a deeper conversation, you will have to seek out the conversants yourself!

[VillyVal]

Can I reply to myself? The Iraq speech is, in fact, now up on Obama's web site.

[NC4Obama]

Coverage on Obama's race speech = Huge
Coverage on Obama's Iraq speech = there was a iraq speech?