Maybe We Can Have Trials, Like That Global Warming Guy Suggested
It is in no spirit of revenge that I remind you that, as little as a year ago, the whole of smart liberal opinion believed that the dissolution of Baathism and militarism had been a mistake, that Iraq itself was a bottomless pit of wasted dollars and pointless casualties, and that the only option was to withdraw as fast as possible and let the inevitable civil war burn itself out. To the left of that liberal consensus, people of the caliber and quality of Michael Moore were describing the nihilist “insurgents” as the moral equivalent of the Minutemen, and to the right of the same consensus, people like Pat Buchanan were hinting that we had been cheated into the whole enterprise by a certain minority whose collective name began with the letter J.
Had any of this sinister nonsense been heeded, it wouldn’t even be Saddam’s goons who were getting their hands on that fantastic wealth in such a strategic country. It would have been the gruesome militias who answer either to fanatical Wahhabism on one wing or to fanatical Shiism on another, and who are the instruments of tyrannical forces in neighboring countries. Hardly a prospect to be viewed with indifference. I still reel when I remember how many supposedly responsible people advocated surrendering Iraq without a fight.
….
So, yes, major combat operations appear to be over, and to that extent one can belatedly say, “Mission accomplished.” If there is any Iraqi nostalgia for the old party and the old army, it is remarkably well-concealed. Iraq no longer plays deceptive games with weapons of mass destruction or plays host to international terrorist groups. It is no longer subject to sanctions that punish its people and enrich its rulers. Its religious and ethnic minorities—together a majority—are no longer treated like disposable trash. Its most bitter internal argument is about the timing of the next provincial and national elections. Surely it is those who opposed every step of this emancipation, rather than those who advocated it, who should be asked to explain and justify themselves.
OK, trials would obviously be a bit much, but I reserve the right to point my finger and shake my head disapprovingly for the next 20 years or so. As with the Cold War, those who doubted the power of America to be a force for good and the universal allure of freedom and democracy are wiping egg off their collective face.
(h/t Bill Ardolino)
Subscribe to Dean's World by Email
4 comments
There is so much wrong with this Christopher Hitchens piece, it is hard to figure out where to start.
Today Iraq is much less violent than it was one year ago, but that is hardly makes Iraq heaven on earth. Millions of Iraqis have been forced to flee their country and millions more are internally displaced inside their country. Baghdad is now a far more ethnically segregated city than it was, with blast walls separating neighborhoods.
It will be many years before life in Iraq returns to normal, and while we all hope that ‘normal’ will be much better than under Saddam, the situation in Iraq is still so fragile, we can not be sure that will be true.
The biggest problem with this kind of chest beating is that like the naive mission accomplished photo op of 2003, it shows a total misunderstanding of what is really going on in the Middle East or the strategic cost of the Iraq war and how it has diminished the US and empowered our enemies.
mikeca:
Will you ever see anything positive in Iraq? Over Saddam’s 20+ term, some 2 million people died in Iraq, Iran and Kuwait. It works out to somewhere around 80k people per year. iraqbodycount.com currently finds around 90k killed over the last 5 years (and this figure is not considered by advocates of our action in Iraq to be very credible). Is that not an improvement?
No, it’s not ideal, but it should give you some perspective on who Saddam was. And thankfully, the recent rate of violence has decreased dramatically, largely due to a commitment by the Bush administration’s surge.
Yes, that same plan that the left criticized in favor of an expedient retreat seems to have worked. Was it the only factor? No, but it was the enabling factor in the stabilization of Iraq. Perhaps it should have been implemented from the beginning, and there I believe you have room to criticize. But it worked, and your inability to recognize this only shows that partisanship is more important than fact to you.
Which enemy is arguably more powerful? Iran you say? I don’t think so. The amount of influence they wield in Iraq is overstated, as evidenced by Iraq’s handling of the Mahdi Army. They are not a credible threat to us unless they become a nuclear power, an aspiration they held well before 2003.
More electricity and clean water is available now than was during Saddam, and more oil is being pumped and sold, the revenue from which is better allocated throughout Iraq, not just to the Baathists.
And as for the chest beating in 2003, it was surely a PR mistake for the President to make the speech in front of that banner. But the banner itself was put up by the crew of the ship, and not at the administration’s direction.
I challenge you, mikeca, to find one positive thing about the war. Where is your indignation for our action in Kosovo? You seem unwilling to recognize that anything good has come of the war in Iraq, as you must feel that it will threaten your political position. Frankly, that’s rather sad.
Today Iraq is much less violent than it was one year ago, but that is hardly makes Iraq heaven on earth.
The average number of people killed under Saddam was 7,000 a month, even when we include the 12 years when he was constrained by the no-fly zones and sanctions. Today the rate of death in Iraq is a tenth of that, there is a free press, leaders are elected, and there is freedom of speech and assembly. Access to water and sewage systems has doubled, as has GDP.
It might not be Shangri-La by our standards, but it’s a hell of an improvement.
it shows a total misunderstanding of what is really going on in the Middle East or the strategic cost of the Iraq war and how it has diminished the US and empowered our enemies.
On the contrary, all our enemies have been weakened. Iran now has to deal with an Iraqi population that is increasingly hostile to them due to their support of the brutal Shia militias, which were crushed at great expense to Iran. Syria has lost their Baathist benefactor. Al Qaeda has been utterly discredited and defeated. And there are resentful mutterings from Arabs that the only real democracies in the region are Iraq and Israel.
Indeed, "Heaven on Earth" looks suspiciously to some of us like just the latest attempt to move the goalposts, now so far out afield that they can’t even be seen by the players. What’s next, whinging that they don’t have enough schools being built?
Iraq today is, undeniably, a much better place than it has been in all of its history, unless you’re a former Ba’thist (i.e. former Arabist Fascist) favored by Saddam. And the enemies of freedom, both the traditional variety and the theocratic variety, are on the defensive in the region. A win not just for Iraq, and not just for the United States, but for the entire human race.
Pardon those of us who’ve been watching this all along if we are a little irritated by the "President Bush Can Do No Right" crowd’s continued efforts to make a sow’s ear out of this beautiful silk purse.
You must log in to post a comment.