Ten years since the start of the Iraq war: a military buildup sold as a way of preventing a repeat of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; an invasion based on inconclusive evidence whose gaps were interpreted in ways most favorable to combat; a false victory symbolized by a “mission accomplished” sign on a jet carrier; a vigorous insurrection costing the lives of thousands of American troops; a surge whose success is still being debated today; and then, at long last, an exit.
That, in a nutshell, summarizes a war whose most definitive lesson was pithily summed up by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates: Any president who wants to send a big American land army to the Middle East again, Gates said, should “have his head examined.”
Comments
Anniversaries are fodder for critics, as it gives them the chance to gloat. Yes, it probably would have served America better to leave the murderous, torturing dictator in place, and "manage" his ability to use WMD. But the president followed the lettr of the law, and gained support of congress before starting this action. Iraq is now a democracy, and an ally of the United States. But was that worth all the cost in blood and treasure? Probably not. Just remember all the Democrats who supported this action-John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and many others. It was a liberation of an oppressed people, and an action that was carried out legally.
Rediculous ! WMDs were a lie. Over 4000 lost their lives, over 4000 families have been left to deal with the loss of a father, ason, a daughter or a wife. Iraq is a basket case at best where the threat of being blown up at a food market is still real. Iraq had historicaly been a counterweight to Iran. How is that working out ?
Without doubt the Iraq was was a total disaster.
Iraq is an ally? I know "Richmond" and I agree on little but an ally? Seriously? I believe they are helping out Assad as we speak. WMD, please. That issue has been settled. There was none unless we are going to talk some minor chemical weapons. But it wasn't chemical weapons that we're going to be the "smoking gun" of a mushroom cloud that sold the war. I don't care if the Dems. were stupid enough to support the war effort or if it was done so legally neatly. It was still stupid and a lie.
To me this is a perfect example of zealotry. Not even this can some folks criticize. Not even this giant failure, budget busting war be criticized by the zealot. Obama's Afghan surge was a waste. Bush's war was a waste. Why is it so hard for some folks to admit some things are just stupid.
Like everyone else, we glorify wars. You go to a museum in Switzerland, a country that has not been involved in a war in centuries, and antique weapons are a large part of the displays. Every country's history books prominently tell the story of wars. Everywhere, culture amplifies human's innate inclination to engage in war. Inevitably, the news media become part and parcel of the agitation for war.
Democrats in Congress supported going to war in Iraq; as a journalist, the authorshould also have examined the collusion of journalists in creating this debacle.
The writer say"who is to blame?" how about our entire gov't they used an attack on America as fuel to limit our rights as citizens and to do what we want to anyone. We, as people, are idiots for allowing our gov't to proceed this way.
What would have happened if we did nothing.
Would Iraqi have turned into modern day Syria ?
What about the Kurds in the north that we were protecting with no-fly zones - at the cost of Billions of dollars a year.
What about Iran - would have they invaded ?
Uh, you may recall that Iraq and Iran fought a border war to a standstill and an economic disaster for themselves during the from 1980 to 1988. Do you seriously think that they would go back to the well that quickly? And even if they did, might it have been better to see the Iraqui's tie down Iran than us.
I guess overlooked....no surprise here.....that some had been there before. Some, like me, actually believed our country could never committ it's human resources to a war whose origin was hyped and at the very least, suspect. Some, like me, were incredulous that there were many like richmond12 above....oblivious to the consequences of war....and those who start them. The last sentence sums up his/her responsibility to those on the ground who fight these drummed up wars....that we should challenge our leaders vigourously if necessary before going to war.
Having fought in Vietnam, I believed we would never go through something like that again....silly me.
Too bad institutional memory lasts only about 25 years.
This is a great point, and one often forgotten.
No mention whatsoever of all the dead Iraqis. I guess they just don't count.
I recognize several readers are not pleased I failed to cite the numbers. It was purposeful, but not intended to be insulting whatsoever ( i do allude to what Iraq might have been like absnet intervention). This was a particularly US focused editorial because the anniversary focused on our intervention. I suspect my failure to go into the consequences in Iraq are seen as cold-hearted, but I didn't intend that at all.
And of course, Iran, whose democracy we overthrew in 1953 on behalf of BP (nee Anglo Persian Oil), is now the preeminent power in the region. Brillliant foreign policy, just brilliant.
I'm old enough to remember the rallying cry, "No More Vietnams!" Too bad the government forgot.
If we mean to start a war, first require Congress to declare war, not done since WW2, and reinstate the draft with no exemptions. This would raise the bar to prosecute only wars necessary to counter extential threats.
Maybe if the chickenhawks that started the Iraq war fought themselves, then they may have listened to the military before sending troops into harms way.
I agree with Nathan. No mention of the Iraqi dead, estimated to be at least 100,000? And how many more were wounded and/or displaced? Our insular attitude, of which this article is stark evidence, shares much of the blame here.
See my reply above. The column could have gone in a number of directions, but that isn't because it was insular but becaause the focus was on our own governmental activities.
I wish people would stop calling it the Iraqi "War" and start calling it what it was, an "invasion."