Do we really want to occupy Iraq for the next 30 years?

[IndianaGreen]

Back in September 2002, Jim Webb, war hero and Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan (the man that gave us the "600-ship Navy"), wrote an article in which he pointedly asked if Americans were prepared to occupy Iraq for the next 30-years.

Here is Jim Webb's article. In re-reading it, one sentence really stood out:

Those who are pushing for a unilateral war in Iraq know full well that there is no exit strategy if we invade and stay.

How do we get out of Iraq without falling in the trap of an Iraqi version of Vietnamization?

Heading for Trouble
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
washingtonpost.com

Do we really want to occupy Iraq for the next 30 years?

By James Webb

Wednesday, September 4, 2002; Page A21

America's best military leaders know that they are accountable to history not only for how they fight wars, but also for how they prevent them. The greatest military victory of our time -- bringing an expansionist Soviet Union in from the cold while averting a nuclear holocaust -- was accomplished not by an invasion but through decades of intense maneuvering and continuous operations. With respect to the situation in Iraq, they are conscious of two realities that seem to have been lost in the narrow debate about Saddam Hussein himself. The first reality is that wars often have unintended consequences -- ask the Germans, who in World War I were convinced that they would defeat the French in exactly 42 days. The second is that a long-term occupation of Iraq would beyond doubt require an adjustment of force levels elsewhere, and could eventually diminish American influence in other parts of the world.

Other than the flippant criticisms of our "failure" to take Baghdad during the Persian Gulf War, one sees little discussion of an occupation of Iraq, but it is the key element of the current debate. The issue before us is not simply whether the United States should end the regime of Saddam Hussein, but whether we as a nation are prepared to physically occupy territory in the Middle East for the next 30 to 50 years. Those who are pushing for a unilateral war in Iraq know full well that there is no exit strategy if we invade and stay. This reality was the genesis of a rift that goes back to the Gulf War itself, when neoconservatives were vocal in their calls for "a MacArthurian regency in Baghdad." Their expectation is that the United States would not only change Iraq's regime but also remain as a long-term occupation force in an attempt to reconstruct Iraqi society itself.

The connotations of "a MacArthurian regency in Baghdad" show how inapt the comparison is. Our occupation forces never set foot inside Japan until the emperor had formally surrendered and prepared Japanese citizens for our arrival. Nor did MacArthur destroy the Japanese government when he took over as proconsul after World War II. Instead, he was careful to work his changes through it, and took pains to preserve the integrity of Japan's imperial family. Nor is Japanese culture in any way similar to Iraq's. The Japanese are a homogeneous people who place a high premium on respect, and they fully cooperated with MacArthur's forces after having been ordered to do so by the emperor. The Iraqis are a multiethnic people filled with competing factions who in many cases would view a U.S. occupation as infidels invading the cradle of Islam. Indeed, this very bitterness provided Osama bin Laden the grist for his recruitment efforts in Saudi Arabia when the United States kept bases on Saudi soil after the Gulf War.

http://www.sftt.org/article09302002a.html

[david_vincent]

1. We'll occupy Iraq

in one way or another, until the oil runs out.

[Coldgothicwoman]

2. Speaking of shuffling force strengths

before I was laid off Friday, one of my coworkers who was in the military and still maintains contact with many of the soldiers she used to know was telling me that there is a big callup being made for January, but not to Iraq. To Bosnia.

She was hardcore for Bush until the Chinook incident. Seems one of her closest friends was in the other chopper (the one that came to rescue the downed one). She isn't hardcore anymore, except about getting rid of Shrubco(tm) and getting our soldiers home.