Washblog

George W. Bush led this country into an invasion of Iraq based upon faulty intelligence of a non-existent threat at best and a complete misrepresentation of purpose most likely. It is widely accepted now (some 2900 dead American soldiers later) that, minus the false evidence of WMD, Congress would not have authorized the invasion. It is widely accepted now (some hundreds of thousand dead Iraqis later) that the Bush Administration scenario of a six-week walk in the park was built upon a foundation of quicksand. It is absolutely certain now (after casting Iraq into a state of sectarian civil war) that George W. Bush has created a quagmire in the Middle East that would not have existed without the US invasion of that country. When George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, and Donald Rumsfeld were leading this country into the invasion of Iraq, they spoke almost exclusively of mushroom clouds and other weapons of mass destruction. Only on occasion did they mention liberating the Iraqi people from the grasp of a brutal dictator. Almost four years later (with every pre-stated mission "accomplished"), rather than discuss the plan for an American withdrawal, the debate is centering on the "creation of a new and stable Iraq" and fighting an "insurgency" that did not exist before our arrival there. In other words, our military is (and has been for its duration in Iraq) being used as a tool in a futile experiment in foreign policy.

So where is the plan to bring our troops home and allow the Iraqis the opportunity to reclaim their country and their sovereignty? Apparently there is none. What we have now is a collection of groups who are attempting to "create a silk purse from a sow's ear." And for what purpose? Are these groups thinking about how many more Americans will die? Are they thinking about how many more innocent Iraqis are to be sacrificed? No, actually these plans seem to be centered on "just not making matters worse." The most ambitious plan at this point seems to be coming from the so-called Iraq Study Group - a bi-partisan group of former government officials who were tasked with coming up with a solution to "the Iraq problem." In the report that this group released, there are some 79 separate recommendations. On the matter of troop withdrawal, this group suggests a re-deployment of some 70,000 (roughly half) of the American combat troops by the "end of 1st quarter, 2008" - over a full year from now. The remaining 70, 000 American troops would remain for an indefinite period of time to continue training an Iraqi security force and keep on the look out for Al Qaida in Iraq.

As I have said, no soldier who sacrifices for his or her country dies in vain. However, far too many have already died for a lie. How many more must be sacrificed? The painful truth is this: There is no strategy that does not make matters worse for some period of time. Knowing this, what possible good can come from the further sacrifice of American blood when it is America's presence in the region that is responsible for a large portion of the bloodshed? The time has come for the American people to stand united and demand that those who have been elected to represent us stop worrying about Bush's legacy and start addressing the issue of saving American and Iraqi lives. The experiment has failed. It is time to bring our troops home and to end this travesty. Any other path is wrong-headed and immoral.

Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue