by John F. McManus
ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:
After five years of war in Iraq, America’s top commander on the scene and the U.S. Ambassador to the beleaguered nation have no answer about when it will end. More troops have been sent during the past year, but the struggle goes on.
Follow this link to the original source: “Frustrated Senators See No Exit Signs”
COMMENTARY:
Five years ago, Iraq was invaded to destroy its weapons of mass destruction. But there were none. Five years ago, Iraq had to be targeted because it was the stronghold of al-Qaeda and the source of the 9/11 attack on our nation. But that turned out to be false as no connection to 9/11 has ever been demonstrated. Five years ago, Saddam Hussein had to be removed as Iraq’s leader. He was captured, tried and hanged. The war has cost 4,000 American lives, tens of thousands of Americans wounded, approximately $3 trillion in monetary costs, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, and a nation in ruins.
All of the initial reasons why Iraq had to be invaded quickly evaporated. Yet, America still has close to 150,000 troops in the nation. And those who claim success after last year’s “surge” in troop numbers don’t want to discuss the 40 Americans per month still dying, the hundreds more still being wounded, and the $3 billion per day that the operation is costing.
From its original justification, the mission has been changed. The struggle is now being fought to create a democracy in Iraq. Where in the U.S. Constitution there appears authorization to invade a nation for the purpose of altering its form of government isn’t discussed, because no such authorization exists.
General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker fielded questions from senators yesterday. They had no answer about when all of this might end. The general admitted: “We haven’t turned any corners. We haven’t seen any lights at the end of the tunnel.” Mr. Crocker dutifully supported the general, and, when asked what might constitute success, said lamely, “We’ll look at the circumstance and assess.” In other words, not even these two men had any answer.
War opponent Senator Kennedy (D-Mass.) expressed the exasperation of many colleagues when he stated: “A year ago, the president said we couldn’t withdraw because there was too much violence. Now he says we can’t afford to withdraw because the violence is down.” Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) asked “Where do we go from here?”
It’s true that the violence is somewhat reduced in Iraq. But the main reason for this is that Shiite cleric Moqtada al Sadr, the actual commander of a large military force, has ordered a truce. If he decides to end it, the killing of Sunnis by Shiites will escalate, and American forces believed to be favoring either side will again be prime targets. Anyone who thinks American military might can successfully enforce peace between these two religious factions ignores the fact that they have been at each other’s throats for 1,400 years. General Petraeus seemed to understand this when he said, “Iraq is hard, and reconciliation is hard. Almost everything about Iraq is hard.”
There are more Shiites than Sunnis in Iraq. For years, Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, loaded his government with his co-religionists, and Shiites are not about to stand by and allow that to happen again. They are backed by Shiites in neighboring Iran, a potentially worsening aspect of this ongoing struggle that few want to discuss.
As for tracking down and neutralizing al-Qaeda, even General Petraeus admits that the terrorist group is more a problem in Afghanistan than in Iraq.
A war that never should have been launched should quickly be ended. But there seems to be no intention on the part of the Bush administration to close it down. And the supposed hard-nosed opponents in Congress continue to allow it to continue.
Stiff Right Jab contributing editor John F. McManus is president of the John Birch Society and publisher of The New American magazine.
Technorati Tags: iraq, al-Qaeda, 9/11, saddam hussein, conservatism, bush administration, internationalism, war powers, u.s. constitution, general patraeus, columnists, stiff right jab, moqtda al sadr, sunnis, shiites
Rate this post:


Stumble It!











anti armchair generals said,
Is Sen. John McCain is willing to continue the war for 100 years if needed, it will be 20 years longer than another religious war in Europe which technically ended the 30 years war in Peace of Westphalia 1648 but actualy had been going for 80 years between factions of Holy Roman Empire and protestants.
Peace of Westphalia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Ratification of the Treaty of Münster. This article or section’s grammar usage needs improvement.
Please improve this article in accordance with Wikipedia’s style guidelines.
The term Peace of Westphalia refers to the two peace treaties of Osnabrück and Münster, signed on May 15 and October 24 of 1648 respectively, which ended both the Thirty Years’ War in Germany and the Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Netherlands. The treaties involved the Holy Roman Emperor, Ferdinand III (Habsburg), the Kingdoms of Spain, France and Sweden, the Dutch Republic and their respective allies among the princes of the Holy Roman Empire.
April 10, 2008 at 8:53 pm