World Affairs Board - View Single Post

FibrillatorD · 05-13-2007, 22:53 PM

I would encourage you, BaronVonUlm, to read up on the history of Iraq. Its a bit presumptuous to assume that because the US has succeeded in nation-building before that it can repeat its success with a completely different nation like Iraq. The truth is, Iraq has been through something like this before. The British, in the middle of the 20th century, tried and failed to establish a unified, albeit arbitrary, state of Iraq, and failed because of many of the same reasons we're failing to secure and unify Iraq now: sectarian conflicts, namely.

Perhaps the biggest mistake has been Bush's and the military's failure to consider the costs of declining public support. Its a hard reality whose ramifications are all the more significant today, compared to the Phillipines, because of modern media capacities and a changed political climate. And to tack success to an unattainability like unwavering public support is just silly.

-Its not just a matter of number killed or resources expended, or even so much the nobility of the cause. Support declines because the war weighs heavier and heavier on our heads. Its quite exhausting. American people realize they're at some point on a foggy mountain, climbing. In 2008 they can either continue climbing into the same path, with no clear direction or end in sight under shoddy leadership, or they can turn around and head back downhill. I think most people realize that we've invested too much to let it Iraq waste away, but our legs are waning, and for good reason.

If we had made better use of our investments, if "success" was a clear and attainable end, and if we had proceeded along a plan which acknowledged the hard cost of declining public support, then we might be looking at a very different situation. But we didn't do these things -at least not adequately.

We need more help from the international institutions. Its a humbling request, for obvious reasons. But its maybe the merriest middle between leaving completely and pushing on stubbornly with a policy that's been given a 5-year trial run; it hasn't completely failed, but it hasn't succeeded either. Yet I believe Americans haven't lost hope that we could be doing better, at home and abroad -hence '06, and likely, '08.

05-13-2007, 22:53 PM	#24 (permalink)
FibrillatorD *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 03-11-07 Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota Posts: 801 Country:	I would encourage you, BaronVonUlm, to read up on the history of Iraq. Its a bit presumptuous to assume that because the US has succeeded in nation-building before that it can repeat its success with a completely different nation like Iraq. The truth is, Iraq has been through something like this before. The British, in the middle of the 20th century, tried and failed to establish a unified, albeit arbitrary, state of Iraq, and failed because of many of the same reasons we're failing to secure and unify Iraq now: sectarian conflicts, namely. Perhaps the biggest mistake has been Bush's and the military's failure to consider the costs of declining public support. Its a hard reality whose ramifications are all the more significant today, compared to the Phillipines, because of modern media capacities and a changed political climate. And to tack success to an unattainability like unwavering public support is just silly. -Its not just a matter of number killed or resources expended, or even so much the nobility of the cause. Support declines because the war weighs heavier and heavier on our heads. Its quite exhausting. American people realize they're at some point on a foggy mountain, climbing. In 2008 they can either continue climbing into the same path, with no clear direction or end in sight under shoddy leadership, or they can turn around and head back downhill. I think most people realize that we've invested too much to let it Iraq waste away, but our legs are waning, and for good reason. If we had made better use of our investments, if "success" was a clear and attainable end, and if we had proceeded along a plan which acknowledged the hard cost of declining public support, then we might be looking at a very different situation. But we didn't do these things -at least not adequately. We need more help from the international institutions. Its a humbling request, for obvious reasons. But its maybe the merriest middle between leaving completely and pushing on stubbornly with a policy that's been given a 5-year trial run; it hasn't completely failed, but it hasn't succeeded either. Yet I believe Americans haven't lost hope that we could be doing better, at home and abroad -hence '06, and likely, '08.