A SOLDIER'S PERSPECTIVE
THE WEB'S LEADING MILITARY BLOG SINCE 2004
Lanny Davis has it right. I hope more anti-war folks in this country read this and realize the reality we are facing today.
By Lanny Davis
Former White House Counsel/FOX News Political ContributorI remember the exact moment I had my first serious doubts about whether I was 100 percent right that the U.S. preemptive invasion of Iraq and the take-out of Saddam Hussein was a serious mistake.
I had been strongly opposed to the U.S. intervention from the start. I felt this way even though I believed (as did most everyone, including the intelligence community) that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and even though I thought that Saddam was a murderous, genocidal thug and the world would be better off — and the U.S. safer — with him dead.
However, I reasoned, the WMD inspectors were back in and we had Saddam surrounded — thanks to George Bush, by the way, for which we Democrats did not give him sufficient credit at the time.
So why risk the uncertainties of a preemptive invasion, loss of life and treasure, and diverting our attention from 9/11 and the war against terror, which most U.S. intelligence indicated had nothing to do with Saddam?
Of course, all these remain good reasons for opposing starting the war, even as I look back now.
But then came my first moment of doubt.
I saw on TV in early 2005, in their first preliminary democratic elections, long lines of Iraqis waiting to vote under the hot desert sun with bombs and shrapnel exploding around them. Waiting to vote!
And then there was that indelible image — an older woman shrouded in a carpet-like cape, smiling gleefully and holding her purple finger in the air for the TV cameras, purple with ink showing that she had voted.
Smiling! In the middle of war! At U.S. troops standing nearby!
Wow, I thought. Is it possible I was wrong?
Is it possible, I wondered, that Iraqis truly did want democracy and freedom and the right to vote and government of the people, just as we Americans do? And were willing to fight for it, with our help?
Wouldn’t that be a good thing? Even a great thing?
Maybe another democracy, however imperfect, other than Israel in the Middle East could lead to more moderation, possibly other democracies? Democracies that could serve as bulwarks against Al Qaeda-type of terrorist states?
Then in 2005-2006 came the increased violence from the Sunni insurgents against American kids, then the sectarian civil war between Sunnis and Shi’ites, with young Americans caught in the crossfire. My certainty in opposing the war and supporting a deadline for getting out re-emerged.
And then in early 2007 came the surge, which so many of us in the anti-war left of the Democratic Party predicted would be a failure, throwing good men and women and billions of dollars after futility. We were wrong.
The surge did, in fact, lead to a reduction of violence, confirmed by media on the ground as well as our military leaders.
It did allow the Shi’ite government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in the last several months to show leadership by joining, if not leading, the military effort to clean out of Basra the masked Mahdi Army controlled by the anti-U.S. Shiite extremist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and in the Sadr City section of Baghdad he claimed to control.
This willingness by the Shi’ite–dominated Maliki government to move against the Sadr Shi’ite extremists won crucial credibility for the government among many Sunni leaders and Sunnis on the streets, who joined together with Shi’ites to turn against the Al Qaeda in Iraq and other Taliban–like extremists.
These are facts, not arguments.
I think there are a lot of anti-war Democrats who, like me, are impressed by these facts and who now see a moral obligation, after all the carnage and destruction wrought by our military intervention, not just to pick up and leave without looking over our shoulders.
Surely we owe the Iraqis who helped us, whose lives are in danger, immediate immigration rights to the U.S. Yet the shameful fact is that most are still not even close to having such rights.
Surely we owe the Maliki government and the Shiiite and Sunni soldiers who put their lives on the line against Shiite and Sunni extremists and terrorists at our behest some continuing presence and support and patience as they strive to find peace, political reconciliation — and maybe even the beginnings of a stable democracy.
The only question is, for how long?
Forever? No. 100 years? No.
But for how long? I don’t know.
I just know I can’t get out of my mind that lady with the purple finger held up, smiling into the camera. If getting in was a mistake, then getting out — how and when — is not so simple as long as there is hope that she can some day live in a democratic Iraq that can help America in the war against terror.
This piece was also published in The Washington Times on Monday, July 21, 2008.
(5) Readers Comments
Leave a Reply
![[UPDATE] The “Face” of Military Dating Scams – The Wall of Shame](http://militarygear.com/asp/wp-content/themes/LondonLive/thumb.php?src=http://militarygear.com/asp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/2.jpg&w=53&h=41&zc=1&q=100)
Anatomy of a Military Dating Scam
@Jc great job scammers NEVER seem to get their lies right glad you sme
l_67adf48d1a7f4cfb5ad16cbc7155d263
@ No Name dont you think you can find something better to do besides a
Esoterik
I read this piece yesterday. I am summarily left unimpressed with Lenny%u2019s supposed cathartic purge with his admission that perhaps there is some other view to this war then the erroneous Democratic rhetoric of %u201Cwe have lost this war.%u201D Is that because I am unwilling to allow those whose destructive opposition to this honorable cause has risen to the level of betrayal, a measure of dignity? Is it because I recognize their adamant vicious antagonism toward this administration as well as our fine forces has been motivated not in any measure by concern, but exclusively for political gain? Is it because their propensity has been to aggressively thwart every reasonable effort made to secure our victory?
Well, quite frankly, yes to all of that! But more importantly, it is because I do not believe Lenny. I see this %u201Cadmission%u201D on his part as nothing more then disingenuous political posturing in an attempt at damage control. I do not give him a pass. Especially when his supposed %u201Cadmission%u201D is laced with the propagandistic phraseology characteristic of the Democrat%u2019s relentless assaults over the last 6 years that are ineffective camouflaged by his employment of a heavy layer of angst.
%u201DThen in 2005-2006 came the increased violence from the Sunni insurgents against American kids%u201D
Lenny purposefully portrays the fine %u201Cmen%u201D and %u201Cwomen%u201D of our armed forces as children. Moreover, children who of course need to be nurtured and protected from harm. And why not? In the eyes of Democrats we are all children that need to be nurtured and protected by the state.
No Lenny, you do not get a pass!
The %u201Cmen%u201D and %u201Cwomen%u201D who collectively comprise our nation%u2019s might are ADULTS hardened and matured by the mantle of their training which they made conscious and enlightened decisions to take on. They don%u2019t need protection; they need support! The enemy needs protection.
Lenny, you are incapable of rendering support because you refuse to see them for who and what they are! No pass for you!
%u201Dsee a moral obligation, after all the carnage and destruction wrought by our military intervention, not just to pick up and leave without looking over our shoulders. %u201D
Gosh Lenny, you were doing so well there praising the reality of our successes, but then you had to go impugn it. I suppose old habits are hard to break and you just couldn%u2019t help delivering an indictment focusing on the bleak exigencies of war. What do you presume motivates an enemy to submit, or brings about his annihilation should he refuse? Where has your %u201Cmoral obligation%u201D been for the past 6 years to support our troops while they valiantly sacrificed in order to protect the interest of our nation%u2019s security? And where is your %u201Cmoral obligation%u201D now to both recognize and acknowledge the outstanding work our people continue to perform by repairing, building and developing Iraq%u2019s infrastructure while under fire?
No pass for you Lenny!
%u201DSurely we owe the Iraqis who helped us, whose lives are in danger, immediate immigration rights to the U.S. Yet the shameful fact is that most are still not even close to having such rights. %u201D
What? No, we don%u2019t. What we owe the Iraqis? We have given them freedom from one of the most brutal despots in history! We have given them by your own estimation, the ability to engage in national self determination! We have given them sustained support and protection of their nascent parliamentary democracy to assure they can secure the benefits of a new found freedom! What more do we owe the Iraqis? Furthermore, by what stretch of the imagination should any Iraqi need or want to immigrate to the U.S. if we finish the job we initiated? You%u2019re still preaching defeat Lenny. You just can%u2019t wait to have one more unnecessary entitlement group within our borders for political exploitation, can you? Oh yes, let%u2019s bring all the poor unfortunate %u201Cvictims%u201D of our %u201Cintervention%u201D home to be swaddled in the loving arms of the %u201Ccompassionate%u201D Democrats. The only %u201Cshameful fact%u201D here Lenny is your unremitting investment in defeat. No pass for you!
%u201DThe only question is, for how long? Forever? No. 100 years? No. But for how long? I don%u2019t know. %u201D
Why the quandary about a sustained presence? Just what problem does Lenny and his cadres of defeatists have with reasonable long term support of this region so vital to our national interest. We have been in Germany and Japan for what, 65 years? Have we considered that continued presence to be unreasonable or untenable? Will we be in those places forever? Why aren%u2019t you asking that question Lenny? It wouldn%u2019t be because it would point out the absurdity of your position would it? No pass for you!
%u201CIf getting in was a mistake,%u201D
You want desperately to take on a veneer of contrition regarding your unconscionable attitude of obstructionism for the last 6 years, yet you persist in wallowing in faux uncertainty, thus condemning our nation%u2019s honor. Oh, the poignant angst! Just how much can you vacillate; you duplicitous fraud?
Sorry Lenny. NO PASS FOR YOU!
Donna
Wow! Well I for one like the piece that Lanny wrote and I’m glad that he is seeing the good that our being in Iraq has caused and not just saying that the surge didn’t work and that we should get out at any cost. I too hope many more anti-war people will see the good that we are doing in Iraq!
NY-David
I agree with the first guy, but for different reasons. Lanny doesn’t get a pass because he suddenly changed sides and wants the world to know. I don’t think anyone can look at the Iraqi’s voting and not feel some sense of pride at what’s been accomplished by our nation in general and the troops in particular. As is pointed out, he still gets his points in about opposition of the war so I disagree with whatever he’s trying to say because I don’t believe him.
The debate is still going on about if it was the right thing to do to go into Vietnam and will be so for this war. When I was in Germany in the mid 80′s, I was pelted with questions about why invading Greneda was necessary. I especially liked this because we were standing in a trainstation funded by the US in the post WWII rebuilding effort. The point is that we are there and we need to finish. McCain still gives a fuzzy response when you ask him what vicotry will look like. I’ve twice heard him say that it should be a “western-friendly” country. I think that needs to get defined a little less flowery and more substance on both sides.
NY-David
Dan Gates
If you find Lanny’s article interesting you should read a paper written back in Jul 2003 (Page 29) and note the authors.
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/nsag-7.23.03.pdf
Pingback: John Edwards: A Cheat Who Claims Elizabeth Edwards Knew About His Affair Since 2006 - So I Guess That Should Exonerate Him Because His Wife Knew | The Hill Chronicles