A lot of people talk about the war in Iraq like it's a real simple problem. Some say that we need to stay and finish the job and others say we need to pull out now.
I tend to agree with the people who say we need to stay there and help rebuild but it's not that easy.
I liken it to getting drug to a party by a friend who then trashes the host's house. Two immediate reactions come to mind. 1) get him the hell out of there now, apologizing while you drag him over the threshold and 2) make him stay and help clean up.
So in order to try and do the right thing, you make him stay and clean up his mess. The problem is that he's still causing damage in the clean-up effort and other people are also causing damage while trying to get him to just get the hell out.
That's not really a fair analogy because Iraq certainly wasn't a party before we got there and some of the people who are trying to make us leave shouldn't be there either. We've done some good things over there like removing Saddam from power (even though I think that could have been accomplished in other ways). But the aftermath is starting to take its toll. Also, you can think of the damage in that analogy as broken dishes, windows, walls etc. and it's easy to rationalize one way or the other. But in Iraq, it's not so easy. The broken dishes are people's lives. And we're not talking about just soldiers or "insurgents" here but children as well. There was an article in the news today that our army opened fire on a minivan and killed some children because they were afraid that the van was a carrying a bomb.
So what do we do? Do we leave the country and hope everything turns out alright? We'll get blasted by the international community for hitting and running (again). But at least we won't be over there killing people's children.
On the other hand, there are other people over there who are actually wanting to do harm. Those are the people we really need to get under control. If we leave, will they just run rampant over the whole country? Are they doing it anyway? Would it get better or worse if we leave?
If we stay, people will keep attacking our troops and our troops will attack back. In such a situation people will get killed. Some of them will be combatants, but some of the will be bystanders. Some of them will be children.
So does the question come down to whether the situation will be better if we stay or if we leave? There's even more we have to consider than that, though. Do the Iraqi people want us there? I'm pretty sure the soldiers don't want to be there and I don't want any of my friends or family that are in the military to be sent to Iraq. Does the international community want us there? I'm pretty sure what the family of those children in the minivan would say.
You could argue the rest of your life about whether we should even be there in the first place. But we are there and the question is now "what do we do about it?" I don't think Bush or any of his cronies have a plan. I think they figure if they keep enough troops on the ground it'll work itself out. Might makes right as it were.
Unfortunately what we've come to understand is that "right makes might." By that I mean that the religious right in this country seems bound and determined to use might to get their message across. We've seen that there's no low they won't stoop to in politics (even against their own party) and that throwing their might around in other countries is not a "last ditch effort" but a "preferred option." Every time this country spends money on a military endeavor, Bush and his cronies get richer. That's why they prefer the military option over the diplomatic. There's no money in diplomacy.
The end result? Children half-way around the world who should have no cares greater than going to school and playing are killed in a senseless act of violence so that the rich can keep getting richer.
Happy holidays.
