The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
In his post "Seven Long and Bloody Years Later," Peter Robinson asks:
Knowing what he knew at the time, was President Bush right to order the invasion of Iraq?
Mr. Bush, we have forgotten, unlike President Clinton during the Balkans bombing campaign, went to both Congress and the UN for approval. The House and Senate overwhelmingly in October 2002 gave consent to remove Saddam—in the Senate with a majority of Democratic Senators. The pro-interventionist speeches of John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Harry Reid were particularly impressive, as were the written and ad hoc oral arguments of a Thomas Friedman, Fareed Zacharia, Andrew Sullivan, Joe Klein and others. But now, the reasons to go in, have been conflated with the actual costs of doing so, and so we are left with the strange apology of former supporters that distills into something like "my brilliant three-week war, your screwed multi-year occupation."
Remember, there were 23 counts to the writ of authorization, the vast majority of them having nothing to do with WMD—which at the time was a consensus issue in the Arab capitals, and the European intelligence services—but including humane concerns such as the fate of the Kurds and Marsh Arabs, violation of both UN and 1991 protocols, harboring of terrorists like Abu Nidal, attempts to kill George Bush, Sr., etc. We also forget that it was a deliberate policy of Saddam Hussein's to project impressions that he had WMD as supposed deterrence given his weakening economy. Given also that Saddam had invaded or attacked 4 of his neighbors, that international support for the costs of the no-fly zones was eroding, that in a post 9/11 climate we were suspicious of all authoritarian Middle East governments that sponsored terrorism, that there were Sunni terrorists in places like Kurdistan, and that Saddam's nuclear program had nearly reached fruition before being bombed preemptively by Israel, it made sense to force the removal of Saddam Hussein.
In order to galvanize public opinion, the administration erred, in hindsight, in emphasizing to the exclusion of the other 22 counts, the fear of WMD. The Left from that opening, and the depression following the 2004 insurgency, fashioned the untruth that "Bush lied, thousands died"--although a million had already died inside Iraq under Saddam, and tens of thousands outside it, thanks to his aggression. Bush's intelligence was no more or less faulty than what was accepted in Europe and the Arab world, who, we forget, were warning in early 2003 that an American invasion might be unwise since it would ignite a chemical or biological response against our troops marshaling in Kuwait. Some lie or conspiracy—to issue to tens of thousands of American troops bulky uncomfortable gas masks and protective clothing in a scorching desert.
Given all of the above—at the time when the U.S. economy was expanding, oil was still cheap, we had a record of success against Saddam, there was strong bi-partisan support for the invasion, the mainstream liberal establishment supported the move, we were in moral fashion pledging not to bomb and leave as we had done in 1991, forsaking Shiites and Kurds, and post-Taliban Afghanistan was relatively still quiet—it was understandable and justified.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
I don't think the choice was wrong in hindsight. Iraq is less of a threat than it was in 2001. There is a chance is can help change the Middle East.
Jun '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
I forgive myself for not understanding that Iraqi society was not ready--emotionally--to accept the new post-Saddam world, and immediately get on with the business of democracy. It took years. The sad thing was, Donald Rumsfeld didn't understand it either. It could've gone so much better if the right military people were in charge from the very beginning--people that could've adapted more quickly. They finally found the right formula, but with many deadly months wasted. All I can say is, I hope we never forget what we learned, so painfully.
Jun '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
As Mr. Hanson has pointed out often enought to become boring on the subject, no war is without mistakes. Why should Iraq have been any different?
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Dr. Hanson, I'm sympathetic to your argument, and agree fully that there was legitimate justification to act.
However, your argument doesn't answer whether there was enough worth in the act to justify its costs, which, ultimately, will determine whether or not it should have been pursued.
The war has had clear costs in blood treasure, and will. Granted, the world is a better place without Saddam around. Nevertheless, he wasn't exactly at the level of Hitler or Stalin in terms of his threat to the liberal world order. If the US disposed of every dirty regime just for being dirty, it would exhaust itself sooner than most of us would probably be comfortable with.
So what else did we get out of it? The democratic domino theory promoted by the neo-cons has yet to come true. The region appears as unstable as ever. Has the opening of Iraqi oil reserves had any immediate observable benefits? I'm not quite sure. The war also helped feed the election of Obama, who is now probably going to allow an nuclear Iran.
Yet, I am still open to hearing your reasons for long-term optimism.
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Victor Davis Hanson:
Remember, there were 23 counts to the writ of authorization, the vast majority of them having nothing to do with WMD...
This is a point found nowhere else. Most conservative pundits allowed themselves to be drawn into the game of focusing exclusively on the WMD premise, so I expect most conservative voters remember only that premise, as I did. Thanks for reminding us.
Jul '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
RLOTW: "...the strange apology of former supporters that distills into something like 'my brilliant three-week war, your screwed multi-year occupation.'"
Aug '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Victor Davis Hanson:
In order to galvanize public opinion, the administration erred, in hindsight, in emphasizing to the exclusion of the other 22 counts, the fear of WMD.
Thank you, VDH, for addressing the relentless task of reminding us of this set of facts leading up to the War in Iraq. There was that very cogent argument building prior to hostilities, as you cited. But then one could feel it: that awkward shift to weapons of mass destruction. Was this an isolated error by one president trying to take a page from his father's playbook on war, the UN and "The New World Order?" Is the UN going to be framework for justifying wars from now on? I'd rather it not be. It seems that nation-states create peculiar situations, through the accumulation of human vices perhaps, where it is not fitting to apply a schoolmarm's rules of the playground to international affairs. I actually fear that this will produce a "peace bubble"--if I may call it that--that will be catastrophic when it blows. Many churches--including mine--have for decades promulgated the dubious peace agenda that I fear directly inflates this hypothesized "peace bubble."
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Cas Balicki
As Mr. Hanson has pointed out often enought to become boring on the subject, no war is without mistakes. Why should Iraq have been any different? · Aug 29 at 3:17pm
....and for an explanation of why, in fact, 2004-2006 weren't wasted years, but a long, largely necessary slog in which great advances were made, see VDH on Uncommon Knowledge, Nov. 2007. Also, his evaluation of the surge in that interview--at a time when the jury was still out--now appears rather prescient, to say the least.
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Add mine to the small chorus of thank-yous, Victor, for persistently reminding us of this. It's difficult to keep in mind that WMDs were not the only justification for invading Iraq, because Bush officials - and anyone daring to defend them - have had those three letters thrown in their faces with varying levels of intensity for seven years.
One danger of letting the left-wing control the conversation is that we lose sight of the big picture in our efforts to defend one small vantage. I know I've personally said that invading Iraq may have been stupid although everyone thought there were WMDs at the time, too easily conceding the first half of that statement in my rush to combat the "Bush lied, people died" inanity.
Jun '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
There was a dramatic change of course/strategy in the war, and it's difficult to believe that it couldn't have been started sooner. Those are the wasted months I'm talking about. I'm not saying people weren't doing their best, but until the strategy changed, their best wasn't working.
Oliver North, Dec 21, 2007 :
They were all wrong. So was I. In January 2006, after nearly a month embedded with U.S. troops in Anbar province, I had written -- and said on FOX News -- that "dispatching more combat troops to Iraq isn't the answer. Adding more trainers and helping the Iraqis to help themselves, is." Gen. Petraeus did both, and it was exactly the right move. The "surge" in combat power -- and trainers -- has changed everything. [...] On a street where terrorists tried to kill us last year, we walked without flak jackets or helmets -- something that would have been unthinkable just a few months ago. "The momentum is in the right direction," Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commanding general of Task Force Marne, told me -- and his troops know it.
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Many of those commenting on this and Peter's original posting have made interesting observations. As someone who went to the White House in 2005 *only* because the nation was at war and I was asked, my question is somewhat different:
Once the United States has entered a war, for whatever reason, can there really be any situation where the American people and America's interests are served by not winning that conflict? I'm old fashioned: I believe that we need to win wars we are engaged in. It's no coincidence that al Qaeda frequently cited Vietnam as a reason to believe that America did not have the stomach to stick it out.
Jul '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
I was against the war from the beginning because as one with a military background I was totally convinced from the beginning that there were no WMD. Having said that, I had no love for Saddam and was happy to see him gone, but, though Bush didn't lie, he mishandled the occupation of Baghdad horribly. The entire thing was a clusterf*** that unquestionably led to many of the problems that began shortly thereafter. The documentation of the errors made during that early period is essentially non-partisan, and they were legion, from the looting of the museums to the disbanding of the army and Bathist party to the use of Blackwater operatives who had no ROE. I suspect that when we leave it will be a picnic similar to the one that happened after we left Saigon. I hope I am wrong.
Aug '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
In addition to the points mentioned, we have to not only remember the cost of the Iraq war, but the cost of the alternative.
There was widespread support for the ramp-up to the war, including shipping tens of thousands of men to Kuwait as a show of strength and to prepare for invasion. At that point, the die was cast. Had the U.S. backed down from that posture, gathered up all the soldiers in the Middle East and gone home, the political will to go back if necessary would have been lost for a decade. Saddam would have known that, and would have acted accordingly.
Immediately before the war, the sanctions had been crumbling, and the U.S. was forced into a situation of permanent maintenance of the northern and southern no-fly zones to prevent the massacres of the Kurds and Shiites. This was an unstable situation that required large garrisons of Americans in Saudi Arabia where they had already been attacked.
Imagine what the middle east would look like today if Saddam had stared down the U.S. and won, and was still in power. Does anyone think the world would be a better place?
Jun '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Cas Balicki
As Mr. Hanson has pointed out often enought to become boring on the subject, no war is without mistakes. Why should Iraq have been any different? · Aug 29 at 3:17pm
I agree. My father was in the 2nd Armoured Division in WWII and landed on D-Day + 3. Allied intelligence had failed to take into account the problem that tanks would have operating in hedgerows. In other words, like all military campaigns, mistakes were made. But they developed new tactics on the fly (such as putting a dozer blade on the front of a tank that allowed it to break through the hedge) and were ultimately successful. War is filled with repeated errors--it's the nature of the beast.
Edited on Aug 29, 2010 at 7:56pmJul '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Bill McGurn
Many of those commenting on this and Peter's original posting have made interesting observations. As someone who went to the White House in 2005 *only* because the nation was at war and I was asked, my question is somewhat different:
Once the United States has entered a war, for whatever reason, can there really be any situation where the American people and America's interests are served by not winning that conflict? I'm old fashioned: I believe that we need to win wars we are engaged in. It's no coincidence that al Qaeda frequently cited Vietnam as a reason to believe that America did not have the stomach to stick it out. · Aug 29 at 6:13pm
Bill, I understand your noble sentiment about sticking it out.
My feeling, however, is that at a certain point, one says to the benighted people of Iraq or Afghanistan, "If you're not willing to sacrifice as much for your freedom as we are, you're not worth one more drop of American blood."
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Nor will it for several more years, at least.
This is a point that annoys me, the notion that once Iraq was free, we'd see all the anticipated results in about the same about of time it takes to cook a bowl of Kraft EasyMac in the microwave.
It took us, here in the United States, about 9 years from the day we General Cornwallis surrendered to ratify our Constutition. Iraq ratified its Consitution in less than two years after Saddam Hussein took it on the lam. I do not know of any country that went from tyranny to freedom in less time, with fewer growing pains, than Iraq. Can't we cut them a few years' slack to sort things out and maintain a semblance of good order before we expect their example to spill over into neighboring countries?
That said, we have seen an example of the "domino effect" in the massive street revolutions in Iran just this past year.
Jul '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Jimmie Bise Jr
That said, we have seen an example of the "domino effect" in the massive street revolutions in Iran just this past year. · Aug 29 at 9:54pm
Domino effect? How about Lebanon, Ghaza, Somalia, the Sudan, Yemen, Pakistan?
Reverse dominoes.
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Jimmie Bise Jr
Nor will it for several more years, at least. · Aug 29 at 9:54pm
First off, I openly accept that it's too early to make an official judgment. That being said, the original question was based on what we know now not what we hope will happen.
As for the Iran protests, are you sure that you're not simply making a post hoc fallacy? There were protests in Iran before the Iraq War, and given the corruption in the elections I'm not sure you can argue the protests wouldn't have happened without the Iraq war. Did Iraq provide a symbolic tool? Sure, I can accept that. That being said, protests don't make a democracy.
I'm just very skeptical of the theory. The US after 1776 clearly provided symbolic influence to Latin American revolutions against Europe. Did that make Mexico, since it bordered the US, an equivalent beacon of democratic achievement? There are too many variables involved, which is why these kind of simplified political science theories are precarious. I think the most we can and should realistically hope for, without further intervention, is a democratic Iraq.
May '10
Re: The War in Iraq: Understandable and Justified
Kenneth
Domino effect? How about Lebanon, Ghaza, Somalia, the Sudan, Yemen, Pakistan?
Reverse dominoes. · Aug 29 at 10:01pm
Oh, good grief, Kenneth. Only goofballs at HuffPo, CounterPunch, and The Nation seriously suggest that Lebanon, Gaza, Somalia, the Sudan, Yemen, and Pakistan would be Switzerland today except for our involvement in Iraq giving al Qaeda recruiting posters. I sincerely doubt that there is any link whatsoever- of either positive or negative valence.
Believing that nonsense is like expecting MoveOn to stop sending out find-raising letters as soon as The Evil GWB... or Rove... or Halliburton... or Cheney.... was gone from the scene. Lebanon was a mess in 1982, before the first Gulf War. There is always another excuse to recruit when you are committed to bringing back the 12th Imam.