Iraq: Two years on

Iraq: Two years on

: In the two years since the Iraq war, we have indeed seen the winds of freedom begin to, what?, waft through the Middle East.

It’s fair to wonder whether those wisps would be a windstorm if some things had happened differently in Iraq: If we had maintained security there… If we had quashed the insurgency before it began with greater force while we were still at war… If fewer Iraqis and American soldiers had died… If, as a result of living in security, we could have worked to rebuild the country’s infrastructure… If we had been able to start buildig the nation’s economy as well… If the terrorists there had not been able to frighten and intimidate anyone from voting…. If they at least had electricituy 24 hours a day… If we had not tortured — and murdered — Iraqi prisoners…

If all that had happened, would we see other citizenries in other nations embloldened as those have been in Iraq and Afghanistan to vote, in Lebanon to rise up and demand self-determination? Would we have seen more popular movements take on the courage to stand up not only to tyrants but also to terrorists as we have seen with the Lebanese dare to Hizbullah and the voters’ dares in Afghanistan and Iraq to the thugs who would have stopped their elections? Would we have seen more steps, abeit baby ones, toward democracy such as we’ve seen in Palestine, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? Would we have seen other, larger steps toward democracy from dictators backed against the wall by their people? Would Americans be more united in the humanitarian cause of nurturing freedom in the world? Would our on-and-off allies in Europe be eager to help?

Fair questions, all. Answers, of course, exist for none.

I wish things had gone better in Iraq; who wouldn’t? Others wish the war had not happened, of course. But not me. I believe the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein in power. I certainly believe the world is a better place with democracy and self-determination and popular movements taking hold in the Middle East. And, yes, I believe that in the long run, the world will, indeed, become a safer place.

That is my view, two years on.

: The New York Times editorial page had a quite different view, of course.

It is an exercise in Eeyorism. The editorial, of course, complains about WMDs as a rationale for war (it never was mine). It reluctantly ackowledges that the real reason may, indeed, have been installing democracy in the Middle East (the one Tom Friedman so often articulated only a page away): “…overthrowing Saddam Hussein would shake up the hidebound, undemocratic regimes in the Middle East and free the natural democratic impulses of Arab and Islamic people. This rationale may still hold up. Iraqi and Afghani voters marching stolidly to the polls was by far the most hopeful image in the past two years.” But it qualifies even that, arguing that Iraq isn’t directly related to the positive events in Lebanon and Palestine. I’d argue with that. But having made that qualification, it comes back, heels dragging, to concede: “With all that said, even the fiercest critic of George Bush’s foreign policy would be insane not to want these signs of hope to take root. That would not excuse the waging of an unnecessary war on false pretences, but it could change the course of modern history.”

Well, however reluctantly, they did acknowledge that good came of the war. Pulling teeth out with your bare fingers would be easier.

There’s a lot more from that perspective, under the dark cloud. But this is what struck me:

The Enduring Principles

Like a great many Americans and most Europeans, this page opposed the invasion of Iraq. Our reasons seem as good now as they did then. Most important is our belief that the United States cannot work in isolation from the rest of the world. There are too many problems, from global warming to nuclear proliferation, which can be solved only if the major powers collaborate. Americans need both the counsel and restraint of other world leaders. The White House has almost unthinkable power, and the rest of the globe has the right to take a profound interest in making sure it is exercised wisely.

No, making nice with France is not the real lesson, “The Enduring Principles.”

The enduring principles of Iraq and Afganistan are these:

People want to be free.

Democracy is a natural right.

Given the slightest chance to grab freedom and self-determination themselves, any people will do that.

The greatest gift we can give them is that chance.

35 responses to “Iraq: Two years on”

  1. Doug Kenline Avatar

    I used to use cuseeme.
    Haven’t used it in a long time.
    It looks to me like a lot has changed since I last used it.
    But it seemed to work pretty good two or three years ago, back when I was playing around with it.
    http://www.cuseeme.com
    http://www.cuworld.com
    Take a look-see and let us know what you think.

  2. Patricia Avatar
    Patricia

    Excellent article, Jeff. Though they have eyes, they cannot see.
    Check out the sum total of my paper’s two-year article: a graphic on casualties (in case we’re too dumb to read).
    http://ocregister.com/ocr/2005/03/18/sections/news/beyond_the_news/article_448320.php

  3. Faramin Avatar

    : In the two years since the Iraq war, we have indeed seen the winds of freedom begin to, what?, waft through the Middle East.
    But millions of people who are on the streets today protesting this criminal invasion, do not agree with you. But whatever! Now it’s time to free yourselves from the rule of the big corporations.

  4. richard mcenroe Avatar
    richard mcenroe

    It would have been nice if we had not drawn down the US military by over 100,000 soldiers, sailors and airmen in the 90’s, and then presented it to the American public as cutting “civil service jobs”. Would those troops, those ships, those planes have helped answer the questions of your second paragraph?
    Perhaps it’s more consoling to some to think there is no answer to that question.
    “Would we have seen more steps, abeit baby ones, toward democracy such as we’ve seen in Palestine, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia?” I think a key element here, and in the freedom movement in Lebanon, is that this wasn’t a quick in and out war, another Grenada or Panama. The world’s tyrants saw that hunker-down-and-wait-till-the-infidels-leave was no longer a working tactic… and so did their subjects.
    “Would Americans be more united in the humanitarian cause of nurturing freedom in the world?” Are they uniting now? You’ve had posters right here on this board celebrating because the Syrians and Hezbollahs were able to stage a large rally in Lebanon in favor of tyranny. You’ve had the LA Times sneering in its editorials that “elections don’t mean much”. Do you really think anything would have changed if Iraq had been another Six-Day War?
    “Would our on-and-off allies in Europe be eager to help?” Look, let’s be honest about this. Our European allies, weren’t. They were profiting directly and monetarily off the continuation of Saddam in power, both through arms sales in violation of the embargo and Oil-For-Food. They were, to borrow an old phrase, “unindicted co-belligerents” of our enemy and the enemies of freedom in this world. And they have not changed. Justin the last couple of months, the Europeans held a major arms show for the mullahs in Tehran. If Europe has its way, when those brutal old men decide to crush the democracy movement in Iran, they will do so under the treads of AMX tanks beneath an umbrella of Roland missiles and Oerlikon guns.
    So there are answers to those questions. They just may not be very palatable to some.

  5. dick Avatar

    Faramin,
    How many of those millions are from Iraq or Afghanistan?
    Also is it like Australia where they claimed 20,000 marchers and the police said there were 1,000?
    In addition to all that, it seems to me more criminal to keep in power a tyrant who fed his people to a shredder, gassed them, destroyed their livelihood, kept medicines and food from those who needed them to line his pockets, and stole the money that was supposed to feed the people to build his palaces. Would you consider those criminal or just normal business?
    The LLL to me has some very weird ideas of what is criminal and what is not. Stand by and let Rwanda happen but protest in droves when someone boots out one of the most cruel dictators in the world today and frees the people to determine their own fate. Thought that would be in line with liberal thinking. After all that is what Saint JFK talked about.

  6. zeppenwolf Avatar

    “Like a great many Americans and most Europeans, this page opposed the invasion of Iraq. Our reasons seem as good now as they did then”
    And that is the self-indictment which reveals their lunacy. It is one thing to be on the wrong side of history, (consistently!), but it is quite another to refuse to admit it whatsoever.
    Particularly galling, to me, was the other recent NYT rant where they said something like, “nobody other than a few neo-cons inside the White House thought this would work”.
    “Nobody”?!? If that means “nobody outside the NYT journalist cocktail party bubble” then fair enough. Otherwise, yeah– we did think that freedom is like a fire, we did think that the Middle East needed a blowtorch up it’s butt, and we did think that the road to peace for Israel ran through Baghdad, (at least for starters).
    Sheesh! It reminds me of that other statement by what’s her face: “I don’t understand how Nixon could have won– nobody I know voted for him!”
    Admittedly, few, I think, thought we would see evidence of progress so soon. Fewer still, I think, realized how awesomely cute Lebanese protester chicks are.
    Yeah, Saddam possibly did not have WMD’s, and we thought he did. But then everyone else on the planet thought he did too. Sorry. Can we get over it? Or should I say, Can we Move On?

  7. Gregg Avatar

    I believe the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein in power. I certainly believe the world is a better place with democracy and self-determination and popular movements taking hold in the Middle East. And, yes, I believe that in the long run, the world will, indeed, become a safer place.
    I can also agree with this entirely, yet still be opposed to the war itself. I don’t really see how the NYT has that different of a view than yours, other than you think the war was just, and they don’t. Their “enduring principles” should be accepted by all, for and against the war. They’re just commen sense principles of good global governmance.

  8. Michael Zimmer Avatar

    Also is it like Australia where they claimed 20,000 marchers and the police said there were 1,000?
    The estimates of the police/state will always be less than the organizers. It’s in the state’s interest for it to be so.

  9. AlanC Avatar

    Hi Jeff,
    Just a couple of points:
    1) 20/20 hindsight isn’t and it’s great that you point out that there are no answers to your questions.
    2) just a different thought experiment here: most all your points revolve around the “we should have had more troops” theme. Okay, now, assuming that we did that….would the Arab world have considered this much more of an oppressibe occupation since more troops would have meant more civilian casualties and less visible nastieness from the “insurgents”? Would it have meant we left sooner so that our presence would not have been there long enough to have made an impact?
    My take on this has always been two fold.
    1) Patience – some things can be cooked at high heat quickly, some need a long slow simmer.
    2) The PR has sorta sucked, but, would the MSM have permitted it to ever succeed?

  10. callahan Avatar
    callahan

    My, we have an abundance of party line ‘stuff’ today.

  11. richard mcenroe Avatar
    richard mcenroe

    Dick รณ They had 150 turn out in Canberra. The Lancet estimated their actual numbers at between 98 and 200,000…

  12. J. Peden Avatar
    J. Peden

    It’s always my party, and I’ll always cry if I want to. And I always want to. I call it “thinking”. My mommy calls it the “terrible two’s”, but she’s going to put me in Head Start. Then I can repeat the same things over and over the rest of my life. Because it’s always my party.

  13. Faramin Avatar

    dick,
    In addition to all that, it seems to me more criminal to keep in power a tyrant who fed his people to a shredder, gassed them, destroyed their livelihood, kept medicines and food from those who needed them to line his pockets, and stole the money that was supposed to feed the people to build his palaces.
    Good questions. But I do have good answers for them.
    That tyrant, that criminal was YOUR criminal. It was “you” who supported him. It was “you” who backed him in almost all what he did.
    Would you consider those criminal or just normal business?
    I have considered Saddam a criminal even when he was a good body to the US and. I have been considering him criminal for years. But speaking of “normal business”, ask that question from YOUR murderous, greedy and bastard corporations who do not hesitate causing death to thousands of people, if it brings in a few more dollars. SEE THE SAME LINK ABOVE to get the answer of the US’s “businesses”.

  14. kl Avatar

    “millions of people who are on the streets today protesting”
    What a failure of imagination. Why not billions? Trillions?

  15. Faramin Avatar

    Funny kl, funny! Why don’t you officially become a comedian? I can see the tallent.

  16. Matthew Goggins Avatar

    Jeff,
    If things had gone more smoothly at the beginning of the occupation, we would have had a lot more support. Fewer people would have gotten blown up, both Iraqi and American.
    But if things had gone more smoothly because we had used a lot more troops, there would have been some unintended consequences as well.
    Right now, Iraqis have learned the hard way that “nationalistic” and Islamist terrorism are a brutal, anti-democratic dead-end. This is a lesson they will not forget, and it will serve them very well as they try to establish a working democracy. We cannot assume that the Iraqis would be ready to rule themselves now without this baptism by fire. We cannot even assume they are ready with this baptism by fire!
    More troops would have led to other unintended consequences as well. As AlanC mentioned, an overwhelming coalition troop presence could easily have been perceived as even more oppressive and less liberating than the limited presence we actually did have.
    I’m not saying we had enough troops on the ground. I’m just saying it’s not clear we needed more troops. The occupation has gone extremely well so far, despite the ongoing violence and sabotage.

  17. Keep Dreaming Avatar
    Keep Dreaming

    What a bunch of dreamers you all are. A full-fledged ‘working’ Iraqi democracy is still a pipe-dream. You can’t be a fully functioning democracy when you’re not even truly a nation-state yet, and Iraq is not a real nation-state that has coallesced over hundreds of years. It is an artificial creation consisting of tribes with different interests and cultures — Shiite, Sunni, and Kurd. It will never hold together. Most of those Iraqis who stood in line to vote didn’t do so for “democracy”, they did so to install a shiite religious government or to gain Kurdish autonomy. Wake up and smell the coffee.
    P.S. — Jeff, dream all you want about how things would’ve been better if the war was handled more properly, but truth be told, no matter what we did at the beginning, the Sunnis would have rejected losing power and would have initiated an insurgency, which we are ill-equipped to defeat. Had we done everything you said we would still be in the same spot.
    Ultimately, when it comes to Iraq, we wasted a TON of resources trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Meanwhile, Iran and North Korea have grown stronger and now we are stretched to thin to confront them.
    What a joke.

  18. Ed Poinsett Avatar
    Ed Poinsett

    Still hand wringing over the most stunning victory imaginable. In 24 months with a loss of less than 2000 troops, we have turned the worst cesspool in the world into a possible model for the entire middle east. Let’s take it six months at a time.
    First there was concern about refugees, that didn’t happen. As a result, Jay Garner was replaced by a State Department guy. The Coalition Provisonal Authority was formed and a provisional Constitution written. The Interim Iraqi Governing Council was formed and began work. How could that time frame have been significantly shortened? What mistakes were made that seriously interrupted what was happening?
    The second six months, the Iraqis began to realize that the USA wasn’t going to fix everything and that the Iraqis needed to pitch in. They had been conditioned to wait until Uncle Saddam took charge. They didn’t know if the Americans were serious or not. After all, lots of Iraqis died after pinning their hopes on the US following Bush #41’s plea to rise up in 1991 against Saddam. They did that and we left thm hanging. So for any level of trust to set in, there had to be some “cook” time. At the end of this second six months, we turned over Soverignty to the Iraqis and began the process of democratization. What steps could we have taken that would have realistically shortened that process? What mistakes seriously delayed it?
    In the third six month period, the insurgency took root and many of the reconstruction projects were halted. The Iraqis were disappointed that things weren’t moving along faster, but it takes a lot of time to put together the ING and the IP to take over policing and military duties. It is still a problem, and no amount of increased troop strength will change that. We had to abandon the Falluja operation because to pursue it would have meant delay in turning over soverignty, plus the Iraqi ING and IP were ineffective. Where was the room to collapse the time frame of that effort?
    Finally during ther fourth six month window, Falluja was cleaned out, Sadr was isolated, Mosul and other Sunni areas were brought under some semblance of control. Preparations were made to register and accomodate voting. Finally in what every “expert” in the world assured us couldn’t happen, the Iraqis showed the world that they wanted their freedom and control of their own destiny. A magnificent outpouring of voters in circumstances that were truly terrifying, they said no to terrorism and yes to liberty. How many weeks/months could we have lopped off that timeline? The Iraqis now understand that a Saudi, OBL is directing a Jordanian, Zarqawi to kill Iraqis. How does that compute?
    So for us at home fretting that it took too long and there were too many mistakes, that view is unrealistic. Americans should be proud of what we have accomplished in Iraq in an extreemely short period of time. Those “Winds Wafting across the Middle East are the direct result of our invasion. IOt is highly unlikely that we will need to invade any other countries, Iran included, because the torch is lit, the people are on the march. The flame will not be snuffed out this time!

  19. Jersey Exile Avatar

    Where o where is the unabashed triumphalism of two months ago, Jeff, when the cool kids were certain that this time we would crush the resistance once and for all with a successful election (never mind when they said the same thing for the transfer of sovereignty, or the capture of Saddam, or the killing of Uday and Qusay, or Bush’s May Day “Mission Accomplished” photo-op speech)?
    When you have to qualify your statement that invading Iraq was still a good idea with more than half a dozen “if”‘s, basically what you’re saying is that if we lived in some parallel universe where even one tiny part of the invasion had actually worked as planned, you’d feel good about it. Well, wouldn’t we all!
    How’s the weather in Bizarro World, btw?

  20. Betsy Devine Avatar

    What’s going on in the Mideast now, and what should we now do about it? I’m sick of the sanitized (or uglified) spin each side creates to justify its own two-years-ago position.
    If anyone could, Jeff could lead both sides to a truce on “there-weren’t-any-WMDs” or “yeah-but-Saddam-tortured-people.” Such pointless debates just polarize people who need to be working together. Because what happens next in the Mideast is going to matter to every one of us, and to my children as well as to your children.
    Oh yeah, I didn’t quite live up to this standard in my most recent blogpost. ( http://betsydevine.weblogger.com/2005/03/19#a2216 ) But I’m planning to do much better in the future!

  21. kl Avatar

    “Why don’t you officially become a comedian? I can see the tallent.”
    Reallllly?

  22. Jeff Jarvis Avatar

    Well, Exile, you and yours complain if those in favor of the war don’t recognize the problems and now you complain if I recognize the problems.

  23. Oliver Avatar

    Jeff, you recognize the problems, see dead soldiers and dead Iraqis and say “nevermind”. That’s the problem.

  24. kl Avatar

    And yet you still haven’t put up a “JEFF JARVIS MUST RESIGN” banner. Gettin’ soft, Ollie.

  25. Jeff Jarvis Avatar

    And, Oliver, you see entire nations freed from tyranny and murder and say “nevermind.” That’s the problem.

  26. Robert McClelland Avatar

    In the two years since the Iraq war, we have indeed seen the winds of freedom begin to, what?, waft through the Middle East.
    Right, because nothing was happening in the Middle East before that. Jeebus, I’ve never encountered a group of people who so willingly wallow in ignorance like you right whingers do.

  27. Robert McClelland Avatar

    And, yes, I believe that in the long run, the world will, indeed, become a safer place.
    No it won’t, simply because it’s doing nothing to stem the plague of terrorism. In fact, by all credible assessments, it’s actually exacerbated the situation. You do remember the fight is against terrorism, don’t you or have you too fooled yourself in to believing the goal is spreading democracy?

  28. Yehudit Avatar

    “If, as a result of living in security, we could have worked to rebuild the country’s infrastructure”
    We did.
    “… If we had been able to start buildig the nation’s economy as well…”
    We did.
    ” If the terrorists there had not been able to frighten and intimidate anyone from voting….”
    The turnout was better than most of our elections – the terrorists didn’t frighten very many people.
    ” If they at least had electricituy 24 hours a day”
    Saddam’s doing – we’ve been improving it.
    “… If we had not tortured — and murdered — Iraqi prisoners…”
    Ask the Iraqis how they feel about this. NOT the “Arab street,” the Iraqis specifically. The answers might surprise you. (HINT: They know what went on in Abu Ghraib under Saddam.)
    This reconstruction has been going excellently given the initial conditions and subsequent challenges. At least as well as Germany and Jpan after WWII. You’re being a bit of an Eeyore too, Jeff.

  29. Jeff Jarvis Avatar

    Yehudit (Judith): Come on now: We who favored the war are accused of seeing no problems; those who opposed it are accused of seeing no good. We need to acknowledge that, of course, nothing is perfect; this was far from perfect; I acknowledge those imperfections (which is a bad choice of words, I’ll admit but it’s parallel, at least): After having done so, I still say it was the right action. If we do not acknowledge the reality of it, then we lose credibility just as those who opposed the war refuse to see the good that has come.

  30. richard mcenroe Avatar
    richard mcenroe

    Keep Dreaming รณ Didn’t you used to post in the 18th century. “The United States are not a credible nation-state as evidenced by the continuing insurgency of the Whiskey Rebellion…”

  31. EverKarl Avatar
    EverKarl

    Jeff,
    I agree with your last comment, but I would pose a number of questions beyond those in your original post. Would things have gone better with more troops, or would they have simply made a bigger target for insurgents? Would the U.S. have been better off if we had moved on Fallujah the first time we surrounded it, or would the securing of the city at that time engendered more sympathy for insurgents (as opposed to when we did move on it, at a time when more Iraqis were getting fed up with the insurgents)? If the nature of the insurgency was an underground organization, what could the U.S. have done to stop it from forming in the Sunni triangle?
    I would suggest that questions like these are as unanswerable as those you posed. Although I’m sure the U.S. military is reviewing its strategy and tactics in an attempt to learn lessons for the future, I would suggest that the yardstick for measuring these types of things is rough at best.

  32. EverKarl Avatar
    EverKarl

    On the subject of numbers:
    If the numbers of protesters reported by Reuters are to be believed, the ballpark is tens of thousands, not millions.
    The 100,000 dead number thrown around by The Lancet is a joke to anyone who knows about statistics, as demonstrated in Slate and The Age of Unreason.

  33. don't worry bout it Avatar
    don’t worry bout it

    Robert McClelland
    Please tell me how our invasion of Iraq has exacerbated terrorism. Since the United States has invaded Iraq, we have deposed a tyrant who supported terrorism and replaced him with a council who is about to begin work on the Iraqi constition. How has the situation become worse? Because we have soldiers dying in a war zone? Unfortunately, that is the nature of warfare. Please tell me that you don’t believe ignoring this problem would have made it go away. A pacifist are you? Just look at Europe around 1935-1939. Tell me how well that worked out for the world and 6 million Jews. If we weren’t in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting now, our children would surely be fighting in the streets of America years from now. Who knows, they may still. At least we’re willing to make difficult choices and follow through on hard decisions. As I’ve said many times, the right decision isn’t always the easiest. The problem with you LEFTWINGERS is that you are weak when it comes to action. And in this case, you couldn’t see any positive results from anything the US has done, because you are all blinded by your hatred of our president. You all cry that our true enemies are getting stronger while we waste resources in Iraq. What? Like any of you would support our country if we took action against someone anyway. Stop your sniveling. If you don’t like the way things are going, you guys should try to get a party that can actually get someone elected to office.
    Ed P. – your are pretty much right on the money in my opinion.

  34. M. Simon Avatar

    faramin,
    You are so right!
    Our criminal. Our responsibility. Thank god we finally did the right thing.