We need to set a date, a clear and defined date, circled on the calendar, for us to leave there.
So, he's finally calling it quits. Tom Friedman, who has supported this war from the beginning, who has stuck through all of Bush's mistakes and catastrophes in the vain hope that we could find the magic bullet, has said we have to withdraw.
I think now would be a great time to revisit one of the most poignant quotes from his interview with me last August:
People come up to me now, because I've written an article basically saying Iraq's not working, and they say "Oh, thank you. Thank you for finally seeing the light." And my attitude is rather hostile to those people. Because I don’t think these people understood the problem from the beginning, and I don't want their thank you now. I feel terrible about Iraq. But I don't feel terrible because I'm going to be seen as someone who was on the wrong side of the war. I feel terrible first of all for all the casualties, and the incredible human devastation--American and Iraqi. But what I really feel terrible about, David, is this project. I thought it was really important. I still think it's important. And I have no apologies to make about thinking it's important. It's still important. I still hope we can salvage something. And so, I don't want anyone to say "Thank you for seeing the light." I haven't seen any light at all. All I've seen is darkness. Because if this project fails, only bad things will come of it for the world that my girls are going to grow up in.
A few days ago, Glenn Greenwald wrote a vicious critique of Mr. Friedman's contribution to Iraq War discourse. While I thought it far harsher than it needed to be, there was one point that I thought legitimate: Supporting the war based on the theoretical "best policy", when this administration has shown no interest in adapting that policy (or even trying to figure out what a "best policy" might look like) is wrong. It is delusional, it is folly, and it is wrong.
It may well be there is the magic combination of policies that can set Iraq right. I have no confidence that the Bush administration will adapt those policies. It is also true that the best reason for both staying in and leaving Iraq is what happens if we do the opposite. Staying in Iraq means being stuck in the middle of a mid-grade civil war that we cannot fix or end, while our global position degrades each day and our military grows more disillusioned and bogged down. Leaving Iraq means plunging it into a brutal bloodbath that could possibly pull the entire region into war--and it would be our fault. There is no good option. But I cannot continue to support a failed policy on the grounds that some administration, somewhere, could still solve the Iraqi dilemma. This one can't. And I can no longer ask American soldiers to die for our leadership's mistakes.
"It may well be there is the magic combination of policies that can set Iraq right."
ReplyDeleteI don't think there is any such combo, if by setting Iraq right you mean some semblance of peace and order under something other than a tyrant, oligarchy or repressive Islamic Republic-style government.
The insurgents with their various and sometimes overlapping agendas can keep doing what they're doing indefinitely. They get assistance, both manpower and money, from throughout the Middle East, and they do what they do on the cheap.
At the rate we're exhausting our military forces and running down our equipment, blowing $2 billion a week, they can break us financially if we really stick with it for a decade or more. Look at what happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan.
The Iraqis have decades of old scores to settle and all that oil to wrangle over, on top of all the ethnic, tribal and sectarian divisions to fight over. Whether we pull out in six months, six years or more than a decade from now, there's likely to be a period of extreme violence and destruction. It's something they apparently have to go through until they wear themselves down, with enough crazies killed, to finally decide peace and harmony are better. That's how it played out in Lebanon in the 1980s.
"That's how it played out in Lebanon in the 1980s."
ReplyDeleteAnd they lived happily ever after, right?
Not that I disagree with the overall point--just that it reinforces how screwed everyone is.