A different look at Iraq

[quaker bill]

Several candidates have come across with the concept that the problem with the war in Iraq was poor management. That if the war had been done properly, more international involvement, broader coalition, UN sanctioning, etc... it would have been successful.

We hear "we need better intelligence", "we needed more troops", "we needed a better post-war plan", "we needed a different mix of forces" and on and on. None of these ideas hold any water for me. These notions only serve to reduce the big picture to a number of smaller debatable judgement calls and shift responsibility away from the intellectual fathers of this unruly bastard offspring.

I argue for a simpler explanation. The war on Iraq was a profoundly stupid idea that has been managed about as well as a profoundly stupid idea could have been.

Fallacy number 1:

If you build a democracy, they will come.

Western democratic government arose within a social context. The progress from feudalism to democracy in the west took hundreds of years and occurred contemporaneously with economic development that built a landed merchantile middle class. It was a grassroots movement that grew from the bottom up. It was not imposed by military force from above.

I say this not as a judgement on the character of civilization in the middle east. I say it only to point out that imposing a western democratic structure on this culture may not be in good harmony with their social structure in context. The PNAC assumption that we can create a 'Shining Beacon of Democracy' in the middle east appears absurd on it's face, at least in the manner we have attempted. To me concept reeks of an air of cultural superiority.

Fallacy number 2:

A western mechanized army can impose it's will in the middle east.

Check out the success Israel has had with this concept. They have won militarily nearly every battle they have been in for 50 years, and their war is not over. They have been brutal and repressive occupiers for 40 years, and their war is not over. They have complete military superiority to include nuclear weapons, and their war is still not over.

Fallacy number 3:

You can defeat terrorism with military force.

Terrorism in fact thrives on military force. The force imposed by others is the best recruiting tool for terrorists. Shoot a car load of civilians, breakdown doors, arrest and detain fathers and brothers, drop bombs on cities. A person who believes enough in a cause to strap explosives to his chest and blow himself up in a crowd is not detered by any of this.

Fallacy number 4.

Removing a repressive central government is always the most humane course of action.

As seen in the Balkans, a strong central government can repress ethnic hostility that would otherwise erupt in civil war. The Sunni, the Shia, and Kurds were killing each other well before Saddam and unless we (the west) are either very lucky or committed to staying there for the long haul they will likely commence to do so again upon our departure.

In essence this war was poorly thought out from it's intellectual roots. There was never any real hope for it's 'higher' goals.

Our troops have carried out their orders as honorably as possible under the circumstances. Unfortunately, they were never the right tool for this job. Worse than this is the waste of their lives and those of the Iraqi's killed in this complete misadventure.

(Note: I purposefully blew past the now long dicredited WMD thing. A post for another day is why I was sure there would not be any...)

[mzmolly]

1. Thou art wise 'friend'

;)

[quaker bill]

5. Thanks mzmolly

[Pale_Rider]

2. To quote the great Mahatma ...

... 'we prefer our bad government to somebody's else's good government'.

[onebigbadwulf]

3. If any of those beaurocratic

idiots knew what they were doing... we could have the entire middle east on its way to peace, prosperity and democracy. Instead of single-handedly supporting israel and sanctioning the bad guys... all we had to do was sneak our way of life into their civilization. Sneak some fast food joints, sneak some movie theaters, sneak some starbucks. Push our way of life subtly into their society to the point where they realize that's what they want.

Works much better than sanctioning, starving, and then bombing!

[RC]

4. But not nearly as profitable to BFEE&friends.

[Eloriel]

6. Fallacy 5

It's okay to invade and conquer a sovereign nation that isn't an immediate threat in any way.


Very nice essay.


Eloriel

[quaker bill]

7. Agreed

Was going to put that one in too, but thought I was running a bit long.

Thanks