Voice Your Opinion to Stay,
Help in Iraq
TO THINK & ASK
World Politics Forum
Sitting on the side of disappointment, by the election and re-election
of President George W Bush, I can understand how many liberals,
Democrats, centrists, and independents have felt these past six years.
We had a president who received fewer votes than his opponent, but
declared that he would rule with a “mandate,” completely ignoring the
side that had more votes than him, which caused us to hate him. Several
weeks ago on 7 November 2006, we all finally got our revenge, blasting
the GOP out of the House and Senate.
Now, we consolidate our gains. President Bush is like a retreating foe
and we must pursue him, just as aggressively as Ann Coulter and Sean
Hannity launched their crusade against the left, right?
Hold on a second!
|"What we must do is to
stay in Iraq for
at least another two years, as our military commanders have advised."
Wouldn’t this kind of political offensive make us just like the people
who have been stepping on us? Caught up in our struggle against Karl
Rove, Bush, and FOX News, have we gotten become blind in our
battle for political survival and forgot our liberal values?
Liberals are supposed to care about people.
We’re supposed to care about death in Darfur, and all of the people
living under cruel oppression today. The mistake we make is that we
allow our hatred for President Bush to supercede our own moral beliefs
to help others, including those in Iraq.
We must not allow ourselves to sink to the level of Coulter or Hannity,
where our hatred of one person or one group of ideologues completely
overrides even our own most deeply held beliefs and convictions. That
is why liberals must look at Iraq in accordance with their own beliefs
and try to figure out what is the right thing to do. If we can put
aside our hatred of President Bush's involvement of the United States
in Iraq, maybe we can try to figure out the answer to a very different
question: What do we do now?
Presently the United States has approximately 140,000 soldiers deployed
in Iraq and the Iraqi security forces (including the Army) have
approximately 325,000 soldiers and officers. There is a wide range of
social readiness in the Iraqi Army, some from extremely poor training
and lack of equipment and some in excellent shape and ready to turn on
Almost daily, Iraq faces terrorist attacks in the form of bombs, car
bombs, mortar attacks and ambushes. Iraqi forces fight Baath (Ba'ath)
remnants, al Qaeda, Shiite, and Sunni militias. Among these militias is
the powerful Mahdi Army, led by Muqtada al-Sadr, which is 10,000 strong
If the United States leaves Iraq rapidly, then Saudi Arabia has
promised to provide material support to Sunni militias, while Iran and
Hezbollah will provide support and training to al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.
The demoralized, poorly organized, trained and equipped Iraqi Army
would be caught in the middle of a regional war. Given that the
security forces have not yet achieved the strength to stand on their
own, and the Iraqi government does not have a stable political base in
the center of Iraqi politics, there is little chance that the Iraqi
government could survive this two-pronged attack.
Critics are keen to blame the Iraqis, but as General George William
Casey has characterized, “the logic of this is you put pressure on
[Iraq Prime Minister Nouri Kamel] al-Maliki and force him to stand up
"Well, you can’t put pressure on a wounded guy. There is a premise that
the Iraqis are not doing enough now, that there is a capability that
they have not employed or used. I am not so sure they are capable of
stopping sectarian violence.”
Various reports from United States' soldiers and advisors have
commented that large parts of the Iraqi Army rely upon them, and that
if the Army were to leave, many of the soldiers and officers in
the Iraq Army would quit. The organization of the Iraqi Army is also
very poor, with officers uncertain who is assigned to their units and
the rosters are unreliable.
Commanders in Iraq and the United States have no idea who is
assigned to which unit until recruits actually show up at their posts.
What we must do is to stay in Iraq for at least another two years, as
our military commanders have advised.
The United States will be training the Iraqi security forces, providing
funding and support and allowing them to gradually assume more and more
of the responsibility of providing Iraqi security. The United States
should gradually allow Iraqi forces to step in as they become
However, we should not rush out and allow unprepared forces to step in
and the situation be damned if they fail. We need to take a
paternalistic role, gradually moving the Iraq Army from trainees to the
rear lines to the front lines. If we do it that way, then they will
have the experience to take over when we leave. This will also give the
Iraqi people and leadership a feeling of empowerment.
People who dislike President Bush could easily blame the fall-out on
But that would be a lie, since we are making a decision as well.
We do have a voice in deciding whether the United States should stay or
leave in Iraq.
If we leave Iraq before its government can stand on its own, then it
will be our fault for the ensuing regional war and the thousands of
people who would perish. It will be our fault for having betrayed our
own liberal ideas of saving the downtrodden and the weak.
We will have become vengeful partisans with no principle, no better
than the Coulter and Hannity-types who we despise.
content is copyrighted by
Ask, reproduction of any kind is not permitted without written