Earlier today,
this diary pointed out that some 100 U.S. troops had signed
An Appeal for Redress, a document that urges Congress to remove all American troops and bases from Iraq. Last night,
this diary suggested that the Bush Administration is seriously considering quitting Iraq. Personally, I would love it if it were possible to bring all of our troops home and simply leave Iraq in peace. The problem is, our getting out, after all that we've done in and to Iraq and its people, isn't going to leave peace behind. Rather, it will leave little more than a path of destruction and the continuing deaths of Iraqi civilians.
An Appeal for Redress
As has already been pointed out elsewhere, American troops are sick and tired of the failed Bush strategy in Iraq. In response to that failed strategy, American soldiers are collecting signatures for An Appeal for Redress, which will go to members of Congress in January. It reads:
As a patriotic American proud to serve the nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq . Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home.
I applaud this effort, and am not about to tell soldiers who have served in Iraq not to send this appeal to Congress. However, I am concerned that American troops leaving in Iraq, without a substantial international plan to actually solve the problems of the people of Iraq, is going to improve nothing but the lives of American soldiers. Not that this isn't important, but there's something, maybe, not quite right, about placing American lives over the lives of Iraqis.
Military Led Pull-Out?
There have a couple of diaries circulating suggesting that either the Administration or the military brass will get us our of Iraq within the next year to a year-and-a-half. this diary has a few suggestive lines:
Casey isn't nearly as delusional as Rummy & Co. And, he has never so expicitly stated that within 12-18 months our forces won't be doing the fighting.
Essentially, he stopped mid-sentence. The other half of that statement is this: "because we won't be here anymore".
The military is not to blame for this mess. They too were sold a fraudulent bill of goods. (Personally, I think that if they were left in charge they may have been able to pull it off, but once the CPA took over everthing went real wrong real fast) They are now looking for a way out, the status quo is simply unsustainable and dangerous for our nation's security. The retired generals, Congressman Murtha, etc., these guys are saying publically what the uniforms can't.
Ironically, it will have nothing to do with who controls Congress. Sometime soon (my source predicts mid-December) the military will force the administration to face facts. I'm imagining that one of the generals will sit Chimpy down (convieniently scheduling something to keep both Rummy and Cheney out of the room) and say it bluntly: "It's over. We're redeploying."
At least one other diary has suggested that the "12 to 18 months" phrase means that Bush is prepared to set a timetable. Bush, of course, has said that he has no intention of calling of timetables because "a fixed timetable for withdrawal in my judgment means defeat."
So, it is unclear whether the Administration has any plans to withdraw, to set a time table, or even to develop a cohesive strategy.
The People
Of course, we all know that increasing numbers of the American people are against this war. Sixty-four percent of Americans were opposed to the war as of October 23rd. From the same poll, 57% would like to hear an announcement that we will withdraw troops by a certain date; and 51% think Democrats would do a better job on Iraq. Most of us, I think, would love to see all of the troops home, the war over, and this stupid, bloody, and illegal war over.
A False Choice
Unfortunately, we are repeatedly falling into a false choice, and one that will ultimately leave us, and the Iraqi people, worse off. Despite Bush's claim that Republicans aren't really 'stay the course', the Administration's preference appears to be set on sticking to failed strategies of dominance. That is, Bush believes that, with enough military might, we can crush the insurgents and make it clear that it is useless for Iraqis to fight against American interests. The last few years, of course, have shown the lie in this.
The proposed alternative to this failed strategy appears to be withdrawl, or redeployment, or some form of getting our collective asses the hell out of Iraq. The assumption appears to be that, if we force the Iraqi government to take responsibility, they will do so. I believe that, ultimately, simply removing troops without a coherent plan for the peace will fail. That is, we might get American troops out, we might never loose another American life in Iraq, but we will leave the Iraq people with the problems that we have helped create there.
Of course, there are those with other plans, but the prime discussion right now seems to be between 'stay the course' and 'withdraw'. We desperately need to form a plan, and adjust it as necessary, that will attempt to locate a peaceful solution to the problems facing the Iraqi people.
The Ethical Dimension
Now, after all of that, I can get to the meat of this diary: We, as Americans, bear some responsibility for the struggle that faces the Iraqi people. We bear responsibility because the United States supported Saddam Hussein's regime for years. We bear responsibility because the United States supported sanctions that ultimately hurt the Iraqi people. We bear responsibility because we invaded Iraq, dimissed damn near the entire public sector, did severe damage to the infrastructure, abused the Iraqi people, etc., etc., etc.
Because we bear some responsibility, we ought to assist the Iraqi people in addressing the problems we have helped to create. I say assist because, were we simply to impose solutions, we would be guilty of participating in the same behavior that got us here - trying to impose our will upon another people.
We, as Americans, as those who bear responsibility for the struggles of the Iraqi people, have an ethical obligation to undo the damage we have done. Were we simply to leave Iraq, it would be no different than beating someone up and walking away. We cannot congratulate ourselves simple for ceasing to beat someone, and we are obliged to help that person get appropriate medical care. The American responsibility in Iraq is to restore Iraqi life. As much as it would be wonderful to completely remove ourselves from the quagmire, it would ultimately immoral.
Does this mean that we are able to help the Iraqi people? No. We may be unable to offer any real assistance at all. If that is the case after trying, then we should leave. However, failure to try and help is simply unacceptable.
When I posted a comment that was a shorter version of this here, I was replied to with this:
It does not matter if every single Democrat in the country all agreed on a perfect plan for Iraq, because Bush would still not implement it. It makes no difference whatsoever.
It is possible that this is true. However, it is incumbent upon Democrats to develop a plan. First, because there is virtue in having a plan that can be presented to the American people and that can be supported by the troops. If Bush won't support the plan, all the worse for him and his party, but no one will be able to say that the Democrats didn't support something substantive. Second, we must be prepared for the fact that, whether we leave now or not, we are eventually going to have to deal with the situation in Iraq. We may not be able to implement a plan to help a violent and divided Iraq right away, perhaps not even until after 2008, but sooner or later we are going to have to deal with it. Better to begin developing a plan now that waiting until nothing can be done.
We cannot, we absolutely cannot, propose that the best solution for the problems facing Iraq is American withdrawl without even attempting to develop, under the leadership of the Iraqi people, a solution to the problems facing Iraq. Certainly, working on a solution will cost more money, will be incredibly difficult, will require vast international cooperation, and may even mean more American soliers dying. No one wants to pay the cost. I don't want to ask American soldiers to be the next and the next and the next to die for the mistake that is the Iraq War. However, I also don't want to have the deaths that have already occurred - whether American or Iraqi or British - to be in vain, and both staying the course and simply withdrawing make those deaths meaningless. Developing a solution, again under the leadership of Iraqis, can redeem this great mistake. Failing to attempt a different strategy is irresponsible and immoral.
I realize that this diary is getting rather long, so I will stop here. In the near future, however, I hope to propose a plan that might serve as an example of how we can engage, with the international community and the people of Iraq, in building a new, peaceful, and possible united Iraq. That, though, will depend on the sort of reception this diary gets.