Post a Comment
Original Content at
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Associate Member, or higher).

April 22, 2007

Unwinnable Civil War in Iraq

By Constance Lavender

Senator Harry Reid's comments open up a space for a long overdue debate on the future of American troops in Iraq.


Senator Harry Reid's comment that the war in Iraq is lost has generated much discussion and debate; and that is a welcome change in a nation that sent its sons and daughters to battle with a wink and a nod, and nary a forethought.
Reid's comments, of course, will be used against him by the same administration, and its supporters, that has repeatedly failed to provide adequate body armor, sent insufficient troops to secure Iraq after the invasion, and which has failed to provide for the health care needs of those wounded in a war waged under false premises.
Reid, however, was speaking about the "long war" that some in the administration claim the illegal invasion of Iraq is now. The real problem is the administration's failure to engage in an honest dialogue about its motives, goals, and strategy in not only Iraq, but the greater Middle East. Indeed, the world.
Mr. Bush, never articulate on whatever topic he speaks, is even less clear on what American foreign policy is in the Twenty-first Century. No wonder the world holds America in such low esteem.
The fact is, however, that American soldiers and sailors have successfully completed every ill-conceived task this President has laid before them: depose Saddam Hussein, establish a democratic government in Iraq, and secure the country for hand-over to Iraqi authorities.
The failure in Iraq is not a military failure; it is a failure of this American president and his misguided foreign policy.
That hand-over should already have happened. Instead the administration has put an unwinnable task before American armed forces; forces that have already been overstretched and misused.
That is, Mr. Bush now expects American forces to be immersed in the middle of a foreign civil war: that's a recipe for disaster of immense proportions as history amply demonstrates. Take, for example, the French Revolution, or any of numerous contemporary examples such as Somalia or Vietnam. The administration claims to be deploying a "new strategy," but what is that  "new" strategy really? Throwing more troops into a crucible of sectarian differences and civil hatreds. Mr. Bush has the ultimate authority to throw as many troops as he wishes within the Iraqi civil war. However, the question the American people must decide is should he?
Troops are brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters... eventually Mr. Bush will find that he has no more troops to throw around because, in the end, troops are human beings: finite and perishable.
Mr. Bush has always been heavy on patriotism and light on real solutions and answers. Look at New Orleans. How much more of his madness must we endure before we stay, "STOP!"

Submitters Website: http://www.blogger.com/profile/4236373

Submitters Bio:

Constance Lavender is an HIV-Positive pseudonymous freelance e-journalist from a little isle off the coast of Jersey; New Jersey, that is...

In the Best spirit of Silence Dogood and Benj. Franklin, Ms. Lavender believes that a free country is premised on a free press.