Dont let war supporters con you by rewriting the recent history of U.S. foreign policy, in order to draw a veil over the way the nation was misled into an invasion of Iraq. Focus on the practical failures of the Bush administration's policy as well as its morality. The war came at a heavy cost, even before the current fighting began: to prepare for the Iraq campaign, the administration diverted resources away from Afghanistan before the job was done, giving Al Qaeda a chance to get away and the Taliban a chance to regroup.
And while the initial invasion went smoothly, since then almost everything in Iraq has gone badly (Saddam's capture is the only real piece of good news from Iraq). American troops are being killed, innocent bystanders are being bombed, the economy remains moribund, and gasoline shortages and power outages continue.
To top it all off, the ongoing disorder in Iraq is a clear and present danger to the U.S.s national security. A large part of the U.S. military's combat strength is tied down in occupation duties, and Ashcroft just announced that more troops are on the way, leaving the U.S. ill prepared for crises elsewhere. Meanwhile, overstretch is undermining the readiness of the military as a whole. And the American taxpayers, already teetering under the load of a burden they cant sustain, are being asked to pay for the rebuilding of hospitals in Iraq, at a time when millions of Americans cant afford health insurance.
Maybe the Iraqi rebellion against the American occupation will evaporate; maybe the cost to America, in blood, dollars and national security, will start to decline. But even if all that happens, Americans should be deeply disturbed by the history of this war. For its message seems to be that as long as you wave the flag convincingly enough, it doesn't matter whether you tell the truth.
By now, youve become accustomed to the fact that the absence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction -- the principal public rationale for the war has turned out to be an utter lie. The war's more idealistic supporters clearly are uneasy about all this. That's why they lay so much stress on the belief (another Bush lie) that the U.S. invaded Iraq on humanitarian grounds, and their hopes for democracy in Iraq. They're not just looking for a happy ending; they're looking for moral redemption for a war fought on false pretenses.
As a practical matter, they'll be disappointed: the only leaders in Iraq with genuine popular followings seem to be Sunni and Shiite clerics. And they are the ones leading the rebellion against the occupation.
And while the initial invasion went smoothly, since then almost everything in Iraq has gone badly (Saddam's capture is the only real piece of good news from Iraq). American troops are being killed, innocent bystanders are being bombed, the economy remains moribund, and gasoline shortages and power outages continue.
To top it all off, the ongoing disorder in Iraq is a clear and present danger to the U.S.s national security. A large part of the U.S. military's combat strength is tied down in occupation duties, and Ashcroft just announced that more troops are on the way, leaving the U.S. ill prepared for crises elsewhere. Meanwhile, overstretch is undermining the readiness of the military as a whole. And the American taxpayers, already teetering under the load of a burden they cant sustain, are being asked to pay for the rebuilding of hospitals in Iraq, at a time when millions of Americans cant afford health insurance.
Maybe the Iraqi rebellion against the American occupation will evaporate; maybe the cost to America, in blood, dollars and national security, will start to decline. But even if all that happens, Americans should be deeply disturbed by the history of this war. For its message seems to be that as long as you wave the flag convincingly enough, it doesn't matter whether you tell the truth.
By now, youve become accustomed to the fact that the absence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction -- the principal public rationale for the war has turned out to be an utter lie. The war's more idealistic supporters clearly are uneasy about all this. That's why they lay so much stress on the belief (another Bush lie) that the U.S. invaded Iraq on humanitarian grounds, and their hopes for democracy in Iraq. They're not just looking for a happy ending; they're looking for moral redemption for a war fought on false pretenses.
As a practical matter, they'll be disappointed: the only leaders in Iraq with genuine popular followings seem to be Sunni and Shiite clerics. And they are the ones leading the rebellion against the occupation.
