We have recently heard on our street that a neighbor lad
– now a strong good-looking Marine – will soon be heading off to
serve in Iraq.
We have recently heard on our street that a neighbor lad – now a strong good-looking Marine – will soon be heading off to serve in Iraq.
We wish him Godspeed. Our small faith group already has him in our prayers, and will continue to do so.
Iraq has become a subject about which many Americans want to avoid thinking or talking. A good citizen takes responsibility for his government and the consequences of the votes he or she makes. Real families with real sons and daughters are fighting and dying for the citizenry. What then of this war?
The Iraq Study Group report on the Iraq war, co-chaired by James Baker III, has been released. Baker himself is a part of the Iraq war report story, as we shall see.
What went wrong? The apparent naivete of the Washington departments (State, CIA) that should have provided information and guidance defies description.
Did they not know of the centuries-old hatred between the Sunnis and the Shiites? Had they forgotten the eight-year war between Iraq and Iran and realize that Iran would of course be interested in extending their influence inside the territory of their enemy?
Had they forgotten that Iranians are Muslims but not Arabs? Had they made no allowances for the disposition of the republican guard and the Baathist loyalists? Loyalists that simply took off their military uniforms and began fighting as guerillas.
Were there no plans at all for administering the country so that the citizens of Iraq would be safe? How is it that many U.S. citizens understood many of these things but the State Department, the CIA, the Defense Department and the White House did not?
The ISG report and Baker stands discredited already. Secretary of State under George H.W. Bush, Baker is the grandson of the founder of the Baker-Botts law firm of Houston. Baker-Botts maintains an office in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and basically represents Saudi and the Saudi royal family interests in Washington.
This is the same Saudi Arabia from whence came 15 of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers, and who continues to fund Mosques around the world that preach the extreme from of Islam know as Wahabbi. Why is there a representative of Saudi Arabia sitting on and even chairing the ISG panel?
The ISG report did not deal with the effects of a premature U.S. pull-out from Iraq. Some of the consequences would be: schools now open to Iraqi children, including girls, might close, the future of the peaceful provinces (most of them) would be in doubt, the possibility of a real chance for a Middle Eastern democracy would end, the civilian Iraqis that have died in the bloody battles will have died needlessly, the memory of our beloved soldiers who have paid the ultimate price would be desecrated, and our allies among Iraqi citizens would be facing a bloodbath of retribution.
What should be done? First of all the word “war” needs to return to its pre-1960s meaning or it should not be used. The concept of war means you have a real enemy (not some nice leaders gone bad) and the only outcomes of war are victory or defeat. Since I will assume President Bush did not choose defeat, we can assume the goal from the start was victory.
In war there is a real enemy. This war got off to a bad start when the White House could not find the fortitude to name the enemy. War on Terror? Does that mean war on the Irish IRA?
The enemy that the West is fighting in this misnamed war on terror is militant Islam. Who doesn’t know that? But you say that most Muslims are not terrorists or even violent. Very true, but most Germans were not Nazis and most Japanese were not militant Japanese imperialists.
Of course, when President Bush happened to call someone a Muslim terrorist, he was reprimanded by the Saudis – the Baker connection – and never mentioned that phrase again.
Most importantly, the veracity and integrity of the word and the assurance of the United States is at stake. Many Iraqi citizens and leaders have joined the U.S. cause in this war. That is reason enough to continue to stand with them. The dishonor which so many Americans feel over our abandonment of our allies in the Vietnam War has never dissipated. We failed in our promises and commitments in Vietnam as a nation.
To fail again would, in my opinion, completely destroy our veracity with both our friends and our enemies.
President Bush, how about appointing a general who is committed to actually winning? President Lincoln tried several generals before he settled on a general who did not believe in defeat, namely Ulysses S. Grant.
The president should declare war on named enemies. How about Al-Qaida, Al Sadr and the Baathist party of Saddam Hussein? We can’t defeat the Baathist Party? What nonsense.
The question is do we have the will to defeat the Baathist Party. The American people cannot take another humiliation. President Johnson achieved a legacy of sniveling defeat. The same legacy awaits President Bush if he abandons Iraq.
To my young neighbor, Godspeed.
Al Kelsch is a Hollister resident who writes a weekly column for the Free Lance. His e-mail address is [email protected].
