American Combat Forces Leave Iraq-Nam

Wednesday night, the last American combat unit, 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, crossed the border into Kuwait. That leaves 52,000 support and training troops in Mesopotamia, and 72,000 private contractors. So, to say that America has left Iraq-Nam is to misrepresent the truth. In the future, further misrepresentations are likely to appear, including that the Iraq-Namese have a functioning democracy, that America achieved its objectives and that is was all worth it.

Over 4,400 Americans came home in coffins. Thousands more were wounded. It is hard to say that their sacrifices were worth it. Nevertheless, they did their jobs, they didn't grumble, and America must decide whether to support the families of the dead and the rehabilitation of the wounded. If so, it would be a break with history -- America is notoriously bad about forgetting its wars veterans. If one needs proof, ask someone who served in Korea in 1952.

Those who point to Iraq-Nam's dysfunctional inchoate democracy as proof that America did some good are quite mistaken. After an election close to half a year ago, there is no government. Belgium has much the same problem from time to time, and many in Europe (like The Economist hardly a radical nutcase of a publication) have suggested that Belgium will eventually split along ethnic lines. The same will happen in Iraq-Nam. Its government (when it finally gets one) will prove itself unable to deliver electricity, water and jobs, leaving a grand opening for Moqtada al Sadr and the Shi'ite militants.

The war was subject to mission creep from the beginning as the alleged reason for the war (finding Saddam's weapons of mass destruction) turned out to be a wild goose chase. The Bush administration waged America's first war of aggression since at least the Spanish-American War, and possibly since the Mexican-American War. Several of those at the very top (President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Field Marshall Donald von Rumsfeld and their enablers) committed the crime for which the Allies hanged top Nazis and Japanese militarists. Whether they should be tried is beyond question. They will live out their days defending the indefensible.

What America really achieved in its misguided war was the establishment of Iran as the regional power in the Gulf. With Saddam gone, there is no other nation capable of checking its ambitions, not even Israel. If the Tehran regime were like the Shah's, this would truly have been an improvement. It is not. Instead, Washington has ensured a puppet regime in Baghdad dancing to Tehran's tune and causing aggravation for years to come.

So, was it worth it? The loss of respect for America that President Obama has only started to restore, the loss of 4,400 plus American patriots, the loss of $2 trillion in final costs, the loss of a million or so Iraq-Namese residents? All so that Iran could be the big dog on the street? Few wars are just battles between good and evil; even World War II had the Communist USSR fighting with the good guys. This war, that has not really ended, was merely a battle over power. Saddam thought he could bluff the Iranians with his WMD claims. The neo-cons thought they could restructure the Middle East, about which they knew nothing. Field Marshall Donald von Rumsfeld thought new technology was a substitute for boots on the ground. And in the end, Iran won the war by sitting it out. As the Cold War movie "War Games" observed, "The only way to win is not to play."

© Copyright 2010 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Ubuntu Linux.

Kensington Review Home