The End of the War in Iraq

by Dillon Freed
December 22, 2011

http://www.weeklyblitz.net/2004/the-end-of-the-war-in-iraq

In 2003, I was one of those who wished to form a human shield in Mesopotamia to protect Iraq from, what I had been taught by every single one of the elders who shaped my weltanschauung, an "evil" United States' military.

Somewhere in 2005, the thought hit me, "I have never read, nor even heard, a single argument from the other side - from those who support the war." (Sadly, the spokesperson for the hawkish cause was the less than articulate President George W. Bush)So with this frightful thought I began reading pro-war arguments and found them not only not wanting, but compelling. Within two months, I boldly declared - to friends who thought me possessed by the demonic - that I now supported the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the broader War on Terrorism.

The volte-face of my beliefs did not happen on September 11, 2001. I was far too indoctrinated at that point; but instead, it happened as I began to not love the United States for its own sake, but to love the principles which she upheld. This was a highly unpopular orientation at my college and in my debates.

And no doubt, the United States has indeed at times appeared hypocritical to its initial intentions, but what this nation does better than others is bend its character back in align with its original, enlightened founding documents. (What a shame that rednecks and others have become associated with such highly intellectual and deeply philosophical statements).

And at the exact time I was falling in love with my nation, I also broke free of my post-modern constraints. Thus, on two fronts I had a robust, abstract foundation to support the war: I loved the United States "for what she is and what she is to be," (Henry Van Dyck's "America for Me"), and felt the ecstasy of a controlled dualism, clear of relativism, take hold of me: "We are good, they, the Islamic radicals, are evil." In my mind, no issue could have been more clear.

And here was a chance for the United States to do many things it was very good at, all at once: first, the United States could undo their past bad acts in the region much as they had disabused inequalities in their own land; second, they could bring a nation, Iraq, that was radical both secularly and religiously to democracy - something it had done before in Japan during the World War II; and lastly, it could eradicate palpable evil (Islamofascists) from this earth - something similar it had done in razing the evil of German Nazis. And the pro-war party has been proved mostly right. And thus, now we are leaving Iraq. The war is over.

In hindsight, it is clear that everything that the anti-war crowd went on and on about concerning the American yen for imperialism and hegemony in the Middle East turned out to be false prophecies or paranoia or lies or (at best and most charitable) errors in judgment. Just to name a few, the supposed desire to steal Iraqi oil was bogus, there was no such desire - in fact, to date, only one U.S. company has had their hand in the Iraqi fossil fuels (Exxon Mobil) and it is a small hand at that. More yet, the fear of a draft never came to fruition as did the idea that the United States would "never leave." The charge that "Bush lied and people died" was ridiculous - the truth was "Bush told the truth and millions got a voting booth." And so on.

Most of my fights have come from those who claimed the United States went to war for reasons other than moral ones. But if those who said so are honest, they have but two things to say as the United States departs: either they pressured the United States successfully, changing it from its diabolical ways into a noble nation, or that they were wrong and the United States had noble intentions from the onset. Why must they make such a decision? Because the United States leaves Iraq with (1) less money - 1 trillion dollars were spent, (2) no oil to speak of, (3) and nearly 5,000 fewer American military men and women.

More than that, the United States' leaves behind a functioning democracy with free elections, a safer Southern Iraqi population and northern, Kurdish population, a totally WMD-free state in a volatile region, and they leave behind hope as well as an opportunity for real self-determination (something the rest of the Middle East and Muslim world have had to fight mostly on their own without the world's leading superpower backing them for nine years).

All this is true even if some Iraqis do not see it as such.

In the New York Times, there have been several Iraqis interviewed about the end of the United States mission in Iraq who claim that Iraq was a happier place before the invasion. If that is true, well then, those Iraqis were the lucky ones not to be on the murderous, psychotic Saddam's radar. And what they are really saying is: "We were okay and content before the United States came to our nation - who cares what was happening to our fellow Iraqis at the same time?" I have nothing but contempt for those Iraqis. And nothing but contempt for those Americans who latch on to those uncaring Iraqis in order to purchase proof at any cost that our mission in Iraq was a failure.

Plato said that man is always in a state of war - and that peace is but a parenthesis in the eternal fighting. When the United States went to war against Saddam, I had no illusion that they would create a Japan or South Korea, but I did hope they would give the Iraqis a parenthesis of peace. That the United States did and every American should be proud of the achievement. Now, it is up the Iraqi's to keep that parenthesis open for as long as possible.

Related Topics:  Op-Ed and Editorial receive the latest by email: subscribe to weekly blitz's free mailing list