I heard a concise list of exactly why we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq on the radio yesterday. No WMDs, no meaningful al Qaeda influence (if any) prior to invasion, Iraq was the counterweight holding Iran in it’s place, and so on. Saddam was a bad man, but he, unfortunately, was key to holding the region together. Read this whole, short, insightful article on the Bizarro World current views of the man we allowed to wipe this all away. Then take a look at of some of what we got in return. Yeah, war is hell, but what should we call it when the war and the suffering was unnecessary?
They made a wasteland and called it peace.
~ Tacitus
He seemed almost broken to me. His voice raspy, his eyes watery, his affect exhausted, his facial expression almost bewildered. I thought I would feel angry; but I found myself verging toward pity. The case was so weak, the argument so thin, the evidence for optimism so obviously strained that one wondered whom he thought he was persuading. And the way he framed his case was still divorced from the reality we see in front of our nose: that Iraq is not, as he still seems to believe, full of ordinary people longing for democracy and somehow stymied solely by “extremists” or al Qaeda or Iran, but a country full of groups of people who cannot trust one another, who are still living in the wake of unimaginable totalitarian trauma, who have murdered and tortured and butchered each other in pursuit of religious and ethnic pride and honor for centuries. This is what Bush cannot recognize: there is no Iraq. There are no Iraqis. There may have been at one point – but what tiny patina of national unity that once existed to counter primordial sectarian loyalty was blown away by the anarchy of the Rumsfeld-Franks invasion. The president’s stunning detachment from this reality tragically endures – whether out of cynicism or delusion or, more worryingly, a simple intellectual inability to understand the country he is determined that the United States occupy for the rest of our lives.
