Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Troy Senik's splendid post, "The Conservative Schism on Libya," has been on my mind ever since he put it up. One way of sizing up the schism on Libya, I suspect, would be to size up conservative opinion on Iraq. My thinking is tentative, but I'd like to try it out with my friends here at Ricochet.
Is Iraq better off without Saddam Hussein? Yes, of course--that's easy. Is it a good thing--indeed, a wonderful thing--that Iraq stands a chance of becoming the first functioning democracy in the history of the Arab world, demonstrating that democracy can indeed succeed in the Middle East? Again, yes--and again, that's easy. The real question is harder--a lot harder.
Do the benefits outweigh the costs?
The benefits, in brief: the elimination of a brutal dictator; a new government based, if, for now, loosely, on the consent of the governed; the establishment of a new currency and banking system; investments that will modernize oil production; and (although this is open to debate) an example that appears to have roused ordinary citizens throughout the Arab world, bringing down corrupt governments in Tunisia, Egypt, and, before this is over, other nations.
The costs, again in brief: More than 4,000 Americans killed and some 37,000 wounded; more than 100,000 Iraqis killed and hundreds of thousands wounded; the expenditure by American taxpayers of some $1 to $3 trillion; several years of the bitterest politics in the United States since the war in Vietnam; and, for now at least, an Iran that feels emboldened.
It's no good saying that we could have lowered the costs by instituting the surge earlier, by turning the nation over to Iraqis more quickly, or by monitoring corruption on the ground more closely. Maybe we could have. But we didn't.
The war in Iraq cost what it cost.
Was it worth it?
- Comment (77)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments:
Jul '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Leslie Watkins
Kenneth
The cost to whom? · Mar 24 at 3:54pm
To Americans. And Iraqis. And any other group who got involved. I'm just thinking that, had Iraq imploded into civil war apart from our invasion, due to the socially debilitating consequences of the sanctions and the failed oil for food program, and given that we and Great Britain were handling the no-fly zone mandates of the UN-sponsored cease fire (and getting shot at pretty often), I cannot help but think we might have ended up there in any event and in a much worse situation at the outset. But then maybe not. · Mar 24 at 7:29pm
Thanks for the clarification. You may be right; we couldn't have afforded a power vacuum in Iraq which would have invited Iranian mischief.
But I still think we should have deposed Saddam, installed a military regime and invaded Iran.
Jan '11
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Kenneth
Klaatu
Kenneth
Absolutely. There was no way he had the capacity to develop a substantial WMD stockpile after Desert Storm without the West knowing.
Edited on Mar 24 at 06:15 pm
I'm sorry but that statement is simply not true. Iraq had the precursors, the knowledge, and the physical capability to produce a significant amount of both chemical and biological weapons without leaving many, if any indicators for our intelligence agencies to pick up.
Then why didn't he? · Mar 24 at 7:36pm
If I had to venture a guess, it would be because he felt he got all the benefits of doings so at significantly lower cost by keeping everyone guessing.
Jun '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
They're not, though. We see Iranians in western and parts of southern Afghanistan, but that's about it. The eastern Pashtuns have always treated the border like it doesn't exist, so Pakistanis were a dime a dozen even in the 80's, and foreigners stick out like a sore thumb. Afghanistan has heated up for three reasons in particular: training from Iran, guns from Pakistan, and a high birth rate in Waziristan.
Oct '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Kenneth
Leslie Watkins
Kenneth
The cost to whom? · Mar 24 at 3:54pm
To Americans. And Iraqis. And any other group who got involved. I'm just thinking that, had Iraq imploded into civil war apart from our invasion, due to the socially debilitating consequences of the sanctions and the failed oil for food program, and given that we and Great Britain were handling the no-fly zone mandates of the UN-sponsored cease fire (and getting shot at pretty often), I cannot help but think we might have ended up there in any event and in a much worse situation at the outset. But then maybe not. · Mar 24 at 7:29pm
But I still think we should have deposed Saddam, installed a military regime and invaded Iran. · Mar 24 at 7:39pm
I'm with you on Iraq. George Herbert should have gone all the way to Baghdad. But Iran would have been a bridge too far...still is.
Jun '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Bush 41 made a deal with a large number of countries. He was a man of his word and did not invade Iraq. It as simple as that. It was a fantastic success both diplomatically and militarily. All we needed was for Bush 41 to be reelected or have an adult to follow him as president. We got Clinton instead.
The Democrats have a lot to answer for in history as to why they can't provide us with experienced and competent presidential candidates. They have a sick party filled with low lifes and know-nothings, especially in the leadership.
I am amazed by how few people know this history. It's as if most of the commenters here get their news from the MSM -- and then they believe it! I have read so many Democratic left-wing talking points above that it really worries me.
Peter, what is going on here? Can't you even discuss who those 100,000 Iraqis were that you mentioned in the costs? How many were jihadists? How many were with Saddam? The 4,000 Americans were military personnel. What about the other side?Many of those should be added to the benefits side.
Sep '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Kenneth
Leslie Watkins
Kenneth
But I still think we should have deposed Saddam, installed a military regime and invaded Iran. · Mar 24 at 7:39pm
For what it's worth, I agree wholeheartedly with your concern about Iran. Very big deal.
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
I'll try to find time to comment on your argument, Leslie, but for now could I just say that I love your posts? Decency, wisdom, and lovely prose. Thanks for joining us here.
Dec '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
This is a very serious subject, and in no way do I mean to make light of it. But about 2005, when it was obvious that Islamists were traveling to Iraq in order to show that America was weak, and those same Islamists were dying in very large numbers, it occurred to me that Iraq was America's light grenade.
It sure does seem that if a nation's enemies cooperate by lining up to be slaughtered by the nation's army in a place other than the nation, there are some advantages.
Jun '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Kenneth,
I meant this line Your good man you're really good. 'tongue in check'. I didn't think I had to put 'after the fact' at the end.
Edited on March 25, 2011 at 5:45amJul '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Good Berean: I am certain that the opinions on Iraq will cleave along the same lines as Libya. The neocons are into nation building and keeping the nationalistic drums a beating; the libertarians will not want to use the coercive power of government to interfere with the right to national self-determination; fiscal conservatives will say we can't afford it; constitutionalsts will say that there is no express power for international peacekeeping in the constitution,; and classical liberals will see that limited government has once again been given lip service to intenationalism. · Mar 24 at 7:18pm
Actually, I was for a war in Iraq. The provocations were more than sufficient and the Islamoblogs had been full of nostrums condemning the weak and decadent peoples of the Great Satan and promoting dawa and jihad against us in our final dotage. But I expected to go in, depose the jerk, and arrange with the Iraqi Army for elections and whatnot. A year, two at most, and out again. Or take the Tony Blair route and establish a credible strong man with army backing. But no, W had to have a pluperfect democratic republic, searching in vain for an Iraqi Washington.
Jul '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
David Obst: Kenneth,
I meant this line Your good man you're really good. 'tongue in check'. I didn't think I had to put 'after the fact' at the end. · Mar 24 at 9:38pm
Edited on Mar 24 at 09:45 p
I knew you were being snarky. But I also know I was right at the time. After all, I had a 50/50 chance, didn't I?
Jul '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Kenneth
Klaatu
I'm sorry but that statement is simply not true. Iraq had the precursors, the knowledge, and the physical capability to produce a significant amount of both chemical and biological weapons without leaving many, if any indicators for our intelligence agencies to pick up.
Then why didn't he?
Money. He bought the governments of France, Germany, and Russia, at least one brain dead member of the UK Parliament, he was playing cat & mouse with the no fly zone issue, and Desert Storm I had wreaked havoc with his military equipment. He had his advisors and general staff and enemies, including every intelligence agency in the G-8, fooled on the WMD question. And he had to keep the charade going with the inspectors. If the UN certified him as WMD compliant, he was a dead man. Whereas everyone in the Middle East knew America would never actually conduct a land war there if they didn't after the Marine Barracks in Lebanon and the Iranian hostage crisis.
If Bush had shown up, trashed the place, and installed a strong man with an option to invade Iran and Syria, we would own the Middle East today.
Aug '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
"No blood for oil" was one of the rallying cries of the anti side at the time and to an extent ever since. As far as I know, and I may be wrong, any oil extracted has been sold to American purchasers among others at world market rates so that the war may have secured supply to some extent but not on the cheap in any sense of that word.
Aug '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
I am still struck by the way the United Nations completely cut and run from Iraq after a single bombing.
This after we won the war against Saddam.
It really soured me on America's spilling blood on behalf of the international community.
It also makes me want invite the UN to relocate its headquarters to someplace more appropriate, like the Congo, Sudan, or Antarctica.
.
Edited on March 25, 2011 at 12:25pmAug '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
nordman: What are we, the world's pro-bono mercenary police force? If so, why?
...The cold war is over...
Yes. It is a result of some decisions that were made in the immediate aftermath of WW2, but the long story short is two fold, Marshall Plan and Nuclear Non-Proliferation - the devastation wrecked by WW2 made rebuilding military capacity a lower priority than infrastructure (in Europe but not the US) and we don't want nukes to be too widely held, by either allies or competitors.
The result is that US military capability grew to confront the Communist threat in Europe, while increasing Naval capacity to retain the Pacific as a US stomping ground.
The European govt's voted to become more socialist (fueled by the 'green' movement and funded by the Soviets) - and lacked the funds or will to substantially increase their military capability.
Additionally, remember the 50's, 60's, and 70's were the time of dismantling of empires, with newly created countries choosing sides - further requiring effort from Europeans while the US faced off the Soviets.
The CW may be over, but the nations that formed the core of that hateful ideology haven't disappeared.
Feb '11
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
I've always figured that if we hadn't invaded roughly when we did the sanctions regime would have unraveled soon after. Then Saddam would have rearmed rather promptly.
The democrats would have shrieked that Bush betrayed us by not dealing with the mortal threat of the Hussein regime. Everyone would believe Saddam had WMDS, and soon he would have.
Bush would have lost the 2004 election to the great warrior John Kerry- who would have promptly cut some sort of face saving deal that left Hussein in power and unmolested. Of course, Kerry would have blamed Bush for missing a historical opportunity to destroy the grave threat of Hussein, but he would claim it was too late to do anything about it except point fingers.
Eventually Saddam would have had an arsenal of nuclear weapons- and he would have used them.
So reluctantly I have to say the war was worth it.
Dec '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
Larry Koler: Bush 41 made a deal with a large number of countries. He was a man of his word and did not invade Iraq. It as simple as that. It was a fantastic success both diplomatically and militarily....
I am amazed by how few people know this history. It's as if most of the commenters here get their news from the MSM -- and then they believe it! I have read so many Democratic left-wing talking points above that it really worries me.
I wouldn't be too hard on people who support the war in Iraq and still do, but are tired of arguing about it after eight years, like me.
It happened, it's done, and Iraq is still important. Even Obama realized he couldn't cut and run. For the most part it is now in the hands of the Iraqis and history will judge.
IMHO, GHWB should not have unilaterally and unnecessarily ended the ground war in 91 before the Republican Guard was destroyed. And he should have actively supported the anti-Saddam uprisings in Iraq in its wake. But he didn't and we got stuck with Saddam until someone did something it.
Edited on March 25, 2011 at 2:20pmMar '11
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
I am astonished that the question needs to be asked. I think it shows how thoroughly our culture has stopped asking the Big Questions.
Before Iraq, there were NO arab democracies. And the dominant wisdom was that Arabs could NEVER exist in a country that respects freedom; it was a laughable proposition. Their "culture" made democracy impossible.
As a result of the US victory in Iraq, there is a functioning parliamentary democracy. It is the most proactive Arab country in the world, with the least anti-semitism (I consider anti-semitism to be a barometer of a nation's pessimisim about the future, which is why Mubarak's Egypt was so bad). And I think it is clear that none of the current (albeit unfocused) revolutions in the region are inspired by Iraq's example.
In sum: History will judge the Iraq war as a wonderful development for the entire region.
Mar '11
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
My biggest regret is that the US, for some idiotic reason, insists on conquering places like Japan, the Philippines, Germany, Iraq, etc. - and then installing Italian-style governments. Why do we do that? We have the most successful and proven system of government in the history of the world. Why don't the Iraqis have a two-party US-style government that forces people to find common ground, instead of a parliamentray system that rewards division?
I blame the idiots in the State Department for this knee-jerk adoration of European systems of government.
The next time we invade a country, let's have them start with the US Constitution!
Jun '10
Re: Iraq: Was it Worth It?
I think it was unfortunate that we had to go into Iraq in 2003 but it was worth it. If Bill Clinton had done his job we wouldn't have had to. But, I want the blame for the problems (problems alway happen in war) to go to the people who were responsible for them (in order of decreasing responsibility):
1) Saddam and his henchmen.
2) Iran
3) The United Nations
4) Bill Clinton
5) Al Qaeda and other Islamists
6) The American Left
7) The International Left
8) John Kerry and any other political leader in any country who lied that Bush 43 lied about WMD.
9) Most of the American Mainstream Media
10) Most of the International Mainstream Media
11) The standard problems that happen in war.
No war or military engagement has just item 11 to contend with. And there are always other contingent factors that develop once a country is made vulnerable by committing troops. Bush did a great job dealing with these problems.
We are in a unique point in history right now. We are living in the aftermath of a tremendous ideological battle -- the Cold War. America is deeply scarred from that great triumph.