Now I've heard it all. First there was a connection between the events of 9-11 and Saddam Hussein. Then there were WMD. Then we had to topple an evil dictator who, in spite of relative powerlessness and being surrounded by us and our allies - many of whom can no longer be counted as allies - somehow represented a threat to us. And now... now we were asked by an ally for our help.
An ally? Our help!?
That's what we're now calling invading a nation and leaving a vacuum that quickly filled with violence. Hmmm.
Perhaps I misunderstood or, as usual, am fuzzy on the timing. I've always had trouble keeping major world events in perspective. Maybe the president meant we're NOW being asked for help by our allies. But that doesn't hold up well either in light of a recent, and fairly vigorously conducted ABC News poll of Iraqis that says they (the ally, I presume) disagree. The percentage of Iraqis who feel the U.S. should leave now, in spite of what it might mean for the their future has increased by more than 10% since last winter to 47%. Not a majority yet, but then again, neither was the number of Americans who voted for our current president. (I know, I know the electoral college doesn't work like that... don't bother commenting to that effect)
More tidbits from the ally:
65-70% of Iraqis polled believe the surge has made things worse, not better, but, to be fair, they were only responding in terms of peace, political stability, and security. ABC should have asked them about something more substantive... like shopping.
60% of Iraqis say their own lives are going badly and 78% say things are going badly for the nation. So much for winning hearts and minds and offering a better alternative to sectarian gang membership.
There's plenty more where that came from. Check it out for yourself at ABCNews.com. They've now interviewed over 4,000 Iraqi citizens since the start of the war under some pretty rigorous surveying standards. They even managed to dig up some statistics that might be considered positive. Those are rare, and clearly not the point of this post, so you'll have to find them on your own.
As for the cheap trick of reading a letter from a fallen soldier's parents, no one can say what Army Specialist Brandon Stout's parents think or feel. No on can say they're wrong.
I'm in the first part of a book about how humans perceive happiness, or anything for that matter. The overriding theme thus far is that no two humans can perceive any significant reality the same way. In fact, even individual humans can't usually perceive something subjective and emotional, and then accurately recall it with any great success. An interesting side note in the book mentions that what makes optical illusions so interesting is that not only does everyone see something other than what their eyes initially tell them, but that they all see the same illusions and then revert back to what they originally saw. Only in those cases do humans ever reach agreement on perceived reality.
Our president continues to perceive the reality of the war in Iraq differently than most of the people I've talked to who have been a part of it, and many of the people I've talked to who haven't. I suppose there's just no point in arguing it anymore. I will agree that we'll never make up for what we did to the innocent Iraqis whose relative stability we shattered when we invaded their sovereign nation. For that, we should be ashamed and we owe it to them to try to sort out some of the mess we've made. We created chaos for them, in spite of tonight's address's call to combat chaos. That's the way I perceive the reality I saw with my own eyes. This book tells me that's not very reliable, and I probably have to agree, but what I see on TV and read in the papers each night seems to refresh my foggy memory.
I doubt it's my place to call for the withdrawal that I wish would never have been a consideration and I doubt that it would make things better or worse. But backing down troop levels now seems like the only worse option. It feels childish to even type this next line given the weight of the matter, but we either need to go big or come home. Since I can't even begin to wrap my brain around what $2.5 billion per week even means, I suppose I shouldn't care that we still can't provide basic medical coverage for a huge portion of American citizens. Instead, we'll give the Iraqis a better life. Now there's a reality I'd like to perceive.
If we can't put enough troops on the ground to overwhelmingly control every major city, then maybe we should listen to our customers and leave them alone. The fact that we can't possibly do either one with a good conscience right now is nothing more than the result of a poorly thought out plan being drug through its paces by a stubborn mule as if continuing to drag it will make it right. Or perhaps it's an optical illusion that we'll all stare at long enough to make it real. Tonight's address sounded as much like an admission of that (you pick one) as we're ever likely to hear.
For everything that remains great about our nation, to have it tainted by this is just plain sad. Is this what it felt like during Vietnam? At least we have the sense to not blame the troops this time around. Perhaps not all of history's lessons have been ignored.
Luth,
disgustedly,
Out.
No comments:
Post a Comment