Supposedly the combat troops stationed in Iraq have left. Supposedly we won. Will there be ticker tape parades? Will there be kissing and wild excitement in Times Square? Hell no. The story is barely a blip on the radar. 50,000 troops remain in a non-combat role. Does that mean they are sitting ducks? Do they have rubber bullets?
Also of importance is how we will honor those who died in this misguided war. Will we have a special memorial for gulf wars dead? Will Iraq and Afghanistan and Persian Gulf 1 be treated separately or will they be treated at all?
It seems so odd to have just posted a thread about the end of WWII and to have mentioned My Lai from the Vietnam era, and really to have nothing to say about Iraq of than the use of the word ‘misguided.’ An evil dictator was removed. However, there are 100’s more left around the world, still inflicting their terror and evil influence on others. Shock and Awe seems to be leaving with ….out being noticed.
A big salute to those who served and to those who gave all. I hope that we, as a nation, will give our military the glorious homecoming they so richly deserve. And I hope those 50,000 who remain will be safe.
What did we “win”?
We’re broke, thanks in part to this abortion of a war.
A billion dollars a week. That is obscene.
I still want those who served to be honored. They just obey orders.
I also think the 50k remaining soldiers are very much in harm’s way.
Oh, absolutely. I’m as pro-military as you can get, and support just about anything for soldiers and their families, except for using them as lab rats in an ill-conceived, poorly planned, politically poisoned and unfunded war.
I couldn’t have said it better myself. That really sums it up.
Beyond the back-and-forth about whether the war was worth fighting, I’d like to hear more about what Iraq is like, how safe it is, how much anti-American sentiment exists. Funny how as our Presdient moved our military focus to Afghanistan, our media’s focus entirely shifted also.
Was the war worth fighting? Well, I still don’t think we have a straight answer on why we undertook it, so it’s hard to say. My guess is that curbing Iran and radical fundmantalism is/was the real goal, and it’s not so much to do with where we fight as that we do fight.
Emma,
Unless Iraq becomes a great dynamic democratic country in the next
couple of decades and leads the middle east into the 21st century, then
history will label this war a horrible fiasco with the loss of nearly 4,500
brave young Americans and billions of dollars PLUS it took our focus
off Afghanistan and the monsters who really planned 9-11 – a mistake
we are paying dearly for today.
Sadam was a mini-Hitler, but he was also an arch-enemy of
Iran, the country who has gained the most from our actions in Iraq,
hates us with religious zeal and will soon have actual WMDs to
attack us and our allies.
Suggest a reading of the late Barbara Tuchman’s “The March of Folly”.
W., Cheney, Rummy and all the other neo-cons could have provided
another chapter with their actions leading up to the Iraq invasion.
“Shock and Awe”
Will never forget Rummy’s comment about the looting of the great museeum shortly after the invasion:
“Things get a little untidy in situations like this.” Untidy!
1 billion a week. 364 billion. Less than Bush’s last two deficits. Compared to 1.75 Trillion for this YEAR alone? And you’re saying that combat ops in Iraq broke us?
What broke us was irresponsible laws, regulations, and actions by Congress, businesses, and homeowners. And then the idiotic keynesian response to a downturn in the economy. I HOPE it CHANGES soon.
Of course, the Iraq theater acted as strategic bait for the terrorists. And when the Iraqis saw that Bush meant to stay, they switched sides and started killing Al Queda. And the invasion did prevent any more development of Saddam’s nascent nuke program and had a side effect of convincing Libya to unilaterally ditch theirs. And it puts a democracy, albeit a shaky one, in the middle of a bunch of dictatorships, which export terrorism, as a good example.
We now have a base of operations against Iran, should we need one.
And, of course, 30 million people were liberated from the grip of one of the worst stalinist dictators in the world.
Thanks for presenting another point of view. I think you are a voice out there in the wilderness, Cargo, or at least as far as this blog goes.
Does it bother you that we did a preemptive strike against that country? That part always bothered me. I think all our other wars have been defensive.
What I find odd is that Obama has taken all of the ‘combat’ troops out of Iraq but at the same time he is DOUBLING the amount of civilian forces there. Which is better, having an armed civilian force there or the combat troops? I don’t know what that answer is, maybe someone else does…
Chalk one up for the books…I agree with Emma! There’s always a first for something, isn’t there?! When I read this article this morning, I was like, “Really? We’re done?” I would have thought this would have been huge news and like MH said…it was kind of a blip. What a horrible waste of precious human life…both American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. That’s really all I have to say.
@Moon-howler
Pre-emptive? What? Remember the strikes by Clinton? Remember that this started with Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. This really was just a continuation of that war. We just held the UN’s words accountable. Unfortunately, the UN doesn’t expect that and does not want any of its proclamations to actually mean anything.
Giving the enemy a 3 month warning is not exactly “pre-emptive” when that target has not complied with agreed upon truce obligations.
So, no, it does not bother me. I don’t believe that we need to wait until we are actually attacked before taking care of an enemy. That said, Saddam was already on the target list from the Gulf War. He just expected the US to act like France and Germany and not actually live up to the UN demands. He didn’t mind the sanctions. HE didn’t miss any meals…..And the oil for food money went to HIS cronies, etc, while it allowed him to place the blame for his people’s suffering on the UN and the US sanctions.
Besides, when the possibility of the attack is nukes, (not saying that Iraq was going to nuke the US), sometimes one cannot wait for actual bullets to be in bound.
As to the intel on WMDs….I spent a lot of time in MOPP gear (anti gas gear) and trained for fall out, for our invasion. We EXPECTED to be hit with gas and to a lesser extent, a mushroom cloud on the horizon…..
Mission accomplished? What the heck was the mission to begin with? Remember the good old days when armies were for defeating an enemy, then going home?
Here are the objectives of OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2003/04/Operation-Iraqi-Freedom-Military-Objectives-Met ):
1. End the regime of Saddam Hussein. Check.
2. Eliminate Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. No nukes found. Evidence of chem-bio program found and eliminated.
3. Capture or drive out terrorists. Check.
4. Collect intelligence on terrorist networks. Partial success.
5. Collect intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction activity. Failure — still no reliable story on what happened to the Iraqi nuclear program.
6. Secure Iraq’s oil fields. Check
7. Deliver humanitarian relief and end sanctions. Check
8. Help Iraq achieve representative self-government and insure its territorial integrity. The jury is still out.
I think that Item #7 is the most significant accomplishment. The U.S. easily could have flattened Iraq and achieved the type of victory to which Slowpoke refers in#15. An air war and ground war fought from a distance would have minimized our footprint on the ground and avoided significant casualties. But the desire to aid the Iraqi people placed American soldiers in harm’s way. We paid a significant price, but avoided destruction of Iraqi infrastructure and population, which now gives them a fighting chance to establish a modern society with representative government.
I think the American people and military demonstrated generosity and true humanitarianism for an Islamic population by freeing them from a tyrant.
The military folks are sticking together. Interesting perspective.
I have had a running fight in my house for seven and a half years. I supported, begrudgingly, going in to Iraq thinking that there were weapons of mass destruction. I didn’t see where we had a choice.
That intell was faulty, whether intentional or otherwise. I don’t think we owed it to the Iraqi people to rid them of their dictator. As people are quick to tell many Latinos…go clean up your own country if it is important enough to you. Overthrowing a dictator is easier said than done. Look at how many people tried to kill Hitler and Stalin.
I am not willing to sacrifice American lives for the people of Iraq. I am not sure democracy is compatible with the mindset in that country. I hope I am wrong.
Kelly and Cargo both made some very valid points for sure.
OK, Kelly,
I have all the respect in the world for hertiage.org. Just a couple of comments on your post #16, which was very helpful for me.
1. Agreed.
2. Oh, Jesus, don’t go there!
3. Well, if that read “capture and/or drive out some terrorists,” I’d agree. Without the word “some” in there, it rings untrue to me.
4 and 5. Agreed
6. We shouldn’t have to care about their oil fields. We gots our own.
7. Here’s why it dragged on for years and cost us dearly….and what did we get for that?
8. rrrriiiiiight!
Then this quote: We paid a significant price, but avoided destruction of Iraqi infrastructure and population, which now gives them a fighting chance to establish a modern society with representative government.
Well, things between the US and the Muslim world are sure honkey-dorey now, aren’t they? Not too sure, but I think we got f**cked on that deal!
hunky-dorey??
@cargosquid
Well, you’re almost right Cargo, but do you really think that 4,515 dead Americans and another 31,882 is a fair price to pay? Do you really think it was our job to free hte iraqi people–what the hell were they doing? And the $1.75 Trillion debt might have been $750 Billion less if we had stayed out of Iraq. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Judas Powell all lied about WMD and I believe they knew they were lying. One dead American was one too many. I agree with Slowpoke but take it one step further and say the Heritage Foundation report is a crock of crap. You should remember that you can’t shine s**t and that is exactly what they are trying to do. And if the terrorists are gone, where did the explosion come from today in Baghdad–I guess it was a car backfire–right? The fact that you spent a lot of time in MOPP gear just goes to show you how stupid we were and how ignorant we were regarding actual intelligence.
Now that I have said all that–here are the numbers regarding the costs in Iraq. Provided by the Christian Science Monitor–
By Stephen Kurczy, Staff writer / August 19, 2010
Boston
The last US combat brigade departed Iraq on Thursday morning, 12 days ahead of the Aug. 31 deadline set by President Obama. It completed a cutback to 50,000 troops, from a high of 170,000. Mr. Obama has said all US service members will be pulled out by Jan. 1, 2012.
More than seven years after the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, Americans, Iraqis, and the international community are assessing the impact of one of the longest and most expensive wars in United States history.
“Given the blood and treasure expended on all sides, it’s a pretty poor outcome,” Toby Dodge, an Iraq specialist at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, told the Monitor’s Scott Peterson in his cover story, “Iraq Score Card: What’s been left behind.”
Here’s a look at some of the numbers.
Financial cost
• $751 billion will have been poured into Iraq by the United States by the end of FY2010, according to a July report from the Congressional Research Service.
• $53 billion of that is earmarked for everything from education and sewer systems to office furniture and paint.
• $142 billion was the highest annual cost, in FY2008, during the surge.
• $23.2 billion been spent on training Iraq security forces since 2004, with an additional $2 billion expected for FY2011.
• $51 billion is the projected total cost for the Iraq war in FY2011.
Human cost
• 4,415 American troops have died in Iraq as of Aug. 18, according to the independent monitor iCasualties.org. An additional 179 British and 139 coalition troops have died.
• 466 killed troops came from California, the greatest loss of any state. Texas lost 413 troops, and Pennsylvania lost 195.
• 31,882 American troops have been injured in Iraq as of the end of July, according to iCasualties.
• Two-thirds of all injured troops came from the Army.
• 9,537 Iraqi troops have died between June 2003 and June 29, 2010, according to the Brookings Institution Iraq Index.
• 97,000-106,000 Iraqi citizens have died in the war, according to IraqBodyCount.org.
Conditions in Iraq
• 20 percent of the population has access to sanitation in the home, according to the Brookings Institution Iraq Index.
• 45 percent have in-home access to drinking water.
• 50 percent have 12-plus hours of electricity a day.
• 30 percent have access to public health services.
Now, the United States faces another test, the Monitor’s Michael B. Farrell writes in his cover story, “The Surge Home.”
“If one gauge of a nation’s humanity is how it treats its returning soldiers, then the US is about to face a significant test,” writes Mr. Farrell. “Experts say the country is woefully unprepared to handle it.”
Related stories
US in Iraq: What’s been left behind
Wounds of Iraq war: US struggles with surge of returning veterans
What is a ‘responsible’ end to Iraq war? Obama must define it after this withdrawal.
Oh George, those stats just make me sick. Thank you for posting them…I guess. The money is staggering. All I could think of when I read that is how Iraq is somehow better off than the Navajo Nation. Many people living on tribal lands don’t have electricity because of the cost of installing it onto their property.
First Americans should somehow be taken care of before Iraqis.
What will the returning troops do to the unemployment rate? Hopefully they will remain with the military. That is a steady job. The money that has been spent there simply takes my breath away. How much of that money has gone to contractors?
How many of the wounded have life altering injuries from which they will never recover?
I have to stop thinking about it. Any plans for us just telling the Afghanis to pack sand? Why do we always want to nation build? arrrrggghhhhh. Whatever happened to conquoring then piecing things back together?
You’re enjoying a nice, big whiff of it!
@Moon-howler
One of the problems with bringing troops home is just that–bringing them home. We have BRACd so many bases that finding places to billet folks will be difficult. So some sort of force draw down seems to me to be inevitable and, as you have noted, unemployment numbers will go up. Who knows where all the money has gone? How much of it never found its way to any project but now lies in some bank somewhere? Perhaps billions of dollars. Iraq now has an army and police force of some 700,000 split about 300,000/400,000. There is a very small (1,500) navy and their airforce has about 3,000 people but will build to something like 18,000.
My question: How can they afford this? Yes, they have oil but where is that money going? And what about rebuilding infrastructure? Are we going to be providing “foreign aid” forever?
That’s where presidential leadership comes in. America supported Somalia with food in Operation Provide Comfort, prevented Bosnian Muslims from being slaughtered in the former Yugoslavia, supported Muslims in Pakistan after their earthquake, and assisted Muslims in Iraq in overthrowing a tyrant.
Instead of apologizing, our president should engage in outreach by pointing out our incredible record of supporting Muslims throughout the world.
@Slow
I would prefer to do that sequentially. Not a big believer in nation building while we are still kicking ass and taking names. Once they are beaten down, fine…but not parallel efforts. It seems entirely too couner-productive.
Rebuild America!
Much of our public infrastucture (roads, damns, schools, water/sewer lines)
is in bad shape. Spend money at home with American workers and material.
JOBS for Americans doing something that must be done for the future of our
country.
@Kelly
Somalia was a disaster from start to finish in the minds of most Americans. It continues to be a problem.
@Big Dog
Gotta say I agree Big Dog.
@Moon-howler #17
That sums up my views fairly well also.
@Big Dog #26
Absolutely! I could not agree more.
@Moon-howler #27
That’s the big question. We had no military, political or economic interests in Somalia. Bush, Sr. sent only a limited number of Americans there as advisors and to help get humanitarian aid to the needy people. I’m OK with that.
Under Clinton, the mission in Somalia turned into nation-building, which I adamantly oppose (reference Big Dog #26). Clinton and Bush, Jr. pursued eerily similar foreign policies based on neo-con ideas of nation-building, only with different goals in different countries. This sort of policy always ends up being us minding someone’s business other than our own.
The United States must do some thorough soul-searching on our role in the world and what a suitable foreign policy should be. We can no longer afford to be the nation that bails out everyone who gets in trouble militarily or economically.
During the Cold War, I was an arch anti-communist and in the 80s worked abroad for the US in a non-military role helping advance our interests. Under Bush, Sr. the last vestiges of the Soviet empire fell. Moreover, it was the Reagan/Bush, Sr. policies that helped bring an end to Apartheid in South Africa; not Carter’s pouting and scolding.
The Cold War was a genuine threat to our existence and justified the expense of winning.
The world is vastly different now, and so is our role in it. Neo-cons and their philosophy of nation-building are not the course we need to be on.
I don’t see how something can be humanitarian when war lords are in control, riding down the streets with automatic weapons openly on their jeeps.
That was the beauty of George H Bush’s plan in Somalia. He put in 25 thousand troops, told the warlords that he was going to feed the people, and if the warlords interfered, they would be destroyed.
Clinton took out all but 2500, tried to negotiate with the same people he wanted to arrest, and didn’t provide support to the troops, and tried to “nation build” without getting rid of the existing power structure.
Bush had a goal and a plan.
Clinton had good intentions.
And we all know what the road to hell is paved with…
I don’t remember the details back that far so I will defer to your memory, Cargo.
I wouldn’t lift a finger to help Somalia because of their practice of genital mutilation on females. I know they aren’t the only country who does that but….they are a good place to start.
That’s exactly right. Les Aspin denied requests from the JTF commander for additional forces and armor. The result was an under-manned, under-equipped force in Mogadishu at the time of the famous Black Hawk Down incident. It was later determined that Al Qaeda was involved. After the Black Hawk down incident, Clinton turned tail and ran. This was to become a pattern (Khobar Towers, U.S. embassy bombings, U.S.S. Cole bombing).
Nevertheless, it does not take away from the fact that the U.S. military fed many hungry Muslims in Somalia who might have otherwise starved.
@cargosquid
@kelly3406
Water under the bridge and over the dam. Does anyone really give a rat’s behind any more?
@cargosquid
@kelly3406
Thanks for providing the details. I had to leave shortly after writing my post and was not able to follow up.
I have no problem with humanitarian aid or feeding hungry people, as long as we are not exposing Americans to undue risk, and not committing our blood and treasure to ventures others should be doing for themselves.
Moon is correct. Somalia has a barbaric culture in many ways , as do many other countries. However, I’m still OK with basic humanitarian help for desparate people.
One of President Obama’s failings is his inability to recognize that some cultures are indeed superior to others, and our foreign policy should recognize that fact. Somalia (mutilating women), Afghanistan (Taliban treatment of women and destruction of non-Islamic historic icons), etc. Western culture is flat-out superior to any of this. The President and those who share his views fail us by assuming all cutures are of equal value and merit.
I don’t feel that the Prez feels the all cultures are equal. I don’t think that any Prez who wants world respect can go around wearing feelings like that on his shoulder. Pres. Bush certainly didn’t act superior either. Hell he even held that old man’s hand. I am sure he cringed the entire time but he was man enough to do it.
I would hope that all of our leaders would treat all nations with dignity and try to find something of value in each of them while denouncing those parts of a nations culture that is repugnant, such as those mentioned above. In the case of the cultures mentioned, it is darn hard. Pretty countryside, beautiful lapis, healthy camels, great beaches, etc might have to be used.
FYI,
– Count out stacks of 100 $100 bills.
– Each bundle is $10,000.
– You would need to count out 100,000 of those $10,000 bundles
to create a billion dollars.
– So far, we have spent $750B on the Iraq war.
And anyone wonders why the country has money problems? 🙄
Amazing.
My also want to ponder the fact that there are an estimated 1.5
billion Muslims in the world. Wouldn’t it be wiser to go after just the
bad apples and not the whole religion? Just asking.
No argument out of me, Big Dog. Apparently the religion is appealing to some folks. I had no idea there were 2.5 Christians in the world until I just looked it up. Amazing.
33% of the people in the world are Christian. 21% are Muslim. 16% non-adherents. Only 6% are Buddist. 6% Hindu. Amazing. .22% are Jews. So why are 21% Muslims worried about .22% Jews? I don’t get it.
– Nearly 4,500 lives of brave, dedicated American lost.
Hundreds more by our coalition allies.
– Over 25,000 Americans wounded.
– 750B spent
– An estmated 100K Iraq citizens killed.
As an American, I hope and pray it was worth it, but it may well
take another decade before we know for certain. It is now in the
hands of the people of Iraq.