If you consider the Bush administration a success, then how do you define failure?  
Last updated:
6/14/04; 9:54:11 AM


September 2003
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        
Aug   Oct




Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Subscribe to "Patriotically Incorrect" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

E-mail this blog's author, Patriotically Incorrect:
Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
 

Wednesday, September 10, 2003

Responsibility

It is now clear that we have a lot of hard (and expensive) work ahead of us in order to leave Iraq better than we found it. Listening to the news lately, it seems that as the size of the task ahead of us sinks in, a greater portion of the American public is getting cold feet about the follow through.

Bush's decision to invade Iraq is a bell that we cannot unring. The question we have to ask ourselves now is this: "What is the next right thing to do?"

Pulling out without making sure that Iraq has the tools to thrive would be even more morally bankrupt than Bush's choice to invade in the first place. We have an obligation now. We cannot just walk away from that.

Bush claimed that invading Iraq was necessary to protect us from terrorism. This was clearly a lie. Rebuilding and stabilizing Iraq, however, is necessary to protect us from terrorism. Before this war, Iraq was brutal, but stable and contained. After Bush's war, Iraq has the potential to slip into anarchy, militant fundamentalism, balkanization or civil war. Does that menu of dangers remind you of anyplace in particular? Afghanistan, perhaps?

As we pound the Bush administration for their arrogance, errors and lies in leading us into war, we cannot advocate for the abandonment of Iraq. We should support our young people in uniform as they do the "next right thing" for us.

My mom forwarded me a letter from one of my cousins today. He is an MP, stationed in a particularly grateful Shiite community. He is working to re-train Iraqi police to serve the people in a post-dictatorial state. While he says he wants Bush voted out "for lying about our motive for being here," he makes it clear that he knows in his heart he is doing good things today for the Iraqi people. He hates seeing negative news reports about the operation in Iraq because the situation he sees around him holds a lot of promise. He takes pride in his job, and is doing his part every day to build a brighter future for the Iraqis around him. He goes on:

"Americans need to be rallying in support of Iraq--sending aid and expertise.  It's an unprecedented opportunity to bring self-determination to the Middle East."

While I wholeheartedly believe that the invasion of Iraq was an unnecessary war (and as John Adams said: "Great is the shame of an unneccesary war,") that does not mean I believe that we should run from this opportunity. Indeed, it is not so much an opportunity as a responsibility.

When we attack Bush on the war in Iraq and on its cost, we should not create in the public debate an incentive to skimp on the necessary work. Yes, the hundereds of billions of dollars that the invasion and reconstruction of Iraq will ultimately cost would have been better spent on protecting our ports and bolstering our first responders, on stabilizing and nurturing Afghanistan, on shoring up Social Security to survive the retirement of the baby boomers, on implementing health care solutions in our own country. But it's too late for that now. We have a job to do. And how well we do that job might determine whether Iraq in 2023 will have more in common with Germany in 1965 or with Germany in 1938.
10:44:59 AM    Put your John Hancock right here! 




© Copyright 2004 Patriotically Incorrect. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 6/14/04; 9:54:12 AM.
Powered by