Many people have given moving testimonials as to why they are involved in Barack Obama's presidential campaign. And while we are a diverse group of people, and the issues and circumstances which motivate us are complex, most of us can point to a single moment where we knew we needed to do something to change the world in which we live. Maria Shriver touched on that yesterday, as she discussed her moment, a conversation with her daughter. Like so many of us, something happened to her that made her want to do something she had never done before... to challenge the status quo. Like so many of us, Barack Obama has shown her that it doesn't have to be this way and that together we CAN make a difference. This is the story of my moment.
I am a soldier, a citizen-soldier. Mostly I am a weekend warrior. But in 2004 I was deployed to Iraq, I spent 11 months in country. Some of you no doubt are curious as to what it was like. Well, it was unimaginable. A full account would require that I write a book. But I'm way too ADD for that, and that's not what this post is about. Briefly, I'd say it was like a post-apocalyptic B-movie. Mad Max. Road Warrior. Different guys are gonna have different experiences depending on where they were and at what time, but the best no bullshit account I've seen which seemed to line up with my own experiences was the documentary Occupation:Dreamland.
I still get goosebumps watching that film. The guys in the film... I feel like I knew all of those guys. I'm reminded of guys I knew. They remind me of Steve. Steve was simply a good guy. Everybody liked him. He died a soldier's death. His convoy was ambushed and he died defending his comrades, while taking heavy small arms fire. This is what happens in combat. You go in knowing that people are gonna die, and you do your best to not let it be you or your buddies. I accept that part of the deal and so did Steve. That's not the issue. The issue is why we were there, not what took place there. We weren't sent to the deserts of Iraq to fight terrorists or liberate an oppressed population, we were sent there for oil.
Alot of people want to try and change history as to how all this happened, but facts are stubborn things. The facts are that our hostility towards Iraq predated any of the Bin Laden sponsored terrorist attacks. The toppling of Saddam's regime was the stated goal of US foreign policy well before George W. Bush ever took office, thanks in large part to Bill Clinton.
It's not at all clear that sanctions against Iraq would automatically be lifted if the country disarmed; President George Bush the elder declared in 1991, shortly after the sanctions were imposed, "My view is we don't want to lift these sanctions as long as Saddam Hussein is in power." His secretary of state James Baker concurred: "We are not interested in seeing a relaxation of sanctions as long as Saddam Hussein is in power."
President Clinton made a point of saying that his policy toward Iraq was exactly the same as his predecessor's. His secretary of state Madeleine Albright stated in her first major foreign policy address in 1997: "We do not agree with the nations who argue that if Iraq complies with its obligations concerning weapons of mass destruction, sanctions should be lifted. Our view, which is unshakable, is that Iraq must prove its peaceful intentions.... And the evidence is overwhelming that Saddam Hussein's intentions will never be peaceful." (See Institute for Public Accuracy, 11/13/98. )
There was no reason to invade Iraq but for oil. The people who masterminded the destruction of the World Trade Center are operating out of Waziristan, in northwest Pakistan. Even today, they launch attacks across the border against NATO forces in Afghanistan. I have no idea what the likelyhood is that these extremists could ever gain control of Pakistan's large nuclear arsenal, but the more I learn about Pervez Musharaff and Pakistan's ISI the more concerned I become that this nightmare scenario could one day become reality. And yet most of the US Army's combat power remains bogged down in Iraq on a fool's errand, trying to seize control of Iraq's massive oil and gas fields while hoping the Iraqis will stop trying to prevent us from doing so. This is clearly insane.
I know many people who believe that Senator Hillary Clinton has changed her ways, and that she will do the right thing once elected. She has promised to do exactly that. But talk is cheap with these people. If Clinton really has seen the error of these blood for oil policies, then why is she taking advice from someone like Micheal O'Hanlon? There is no doubt in my mind that if Hillary Clinton is elected President, she will attempt to rescue the occupation of Iraq from Bush's well documented incompetence. It is obvious to me that it is Hillary Clinton's intention to try and "win" the Iraq War. She will say whatever she needs to say to win the election, and then triangulate her way out of that once in office. This means permanent bases, oil contracts, the whole deal. And alot more guys like Steve getting wasted on an immoral policy that does nothing to provide any security to anyone except Big Oil. When I look at Barack Obama's impressive list of foreign policy advisors, that tells me all I need to know. The people he's listening to have long challenged conventional wisdom in Washington. They're committed to fundamentally changing our nation's foreign policy. Given the choice between someone like Samantha Power or Micheal O'Hanlon, I'll take the former over the latter any day. That more than anything else is why I am supporting Barack Obama.
In closing I just want to point out that my anger over what happened is not indicative of a medical condition requiring treatment. While it is certainly true that some guys are unable to adjust when they come home, most of us do. And while I'll never be the same again, I'm doing OK. I'm not pissed off because I have a combat stress disorder. I'm pissed off because I'm a normal fucking human being. I don't understand how anyone could not be pissed off by this bullshit. The people who most actively and prominently promoted this immoral policy should not be rewarded for the disastrous choices they made. Because real people had to pay the price for those choices.