Troops out of Iraq by 2011?
Posted: August 26, 2008
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki demands that all foriegn troops leave Iraq by the end of 2011, and one wonders on hearing this sort of thing whether we should just get the hell out of there now and leave Mr. Maliki and his little army at the mercy of al-Qaeda, the Baathists, the Sadrists, and other assorted terrorists. How long would it take before they got their hands on the pudgy little sourpuss and had him strung up, beheaded, and dragged through the streets?
Does 4,000 American dead and a trillion dollars not count for anything in the tightly wound head of this annoying little bureaucrat who, after all, owes his life, his job, and his country to the US?
Does a little diplomacy, social nicety, or just plain gratitude not figure in when it comes to the Great Satan? Public consumption in Iraq is one thing, but how about a simple thank you before opening your big yap? If the surge had not worked, and his life was on the line, would he be making such careless demands or would he be begging Bush and the troops to stay?
And how about the timing? Why doesn't al-Maliki just fly to Denver and give a wet kiss (Harry Reid's line) to Barack Sheldon Obama and the Democrats at the Convention, the ones who did everything to pull the rug out from under his feet when the war was going badly (only to become strangely silent as the war improved)? And while there, why not throw dirt in the eyes of Bush, McCain, and the Republicans, the ones who stood by the little creep and his country despite intense pressure from every corner when all hell was breaking loose?
Yes, there is a need to iron out some legal framework for maintaining US and other nations' troops in Iraq after the UN Mandate expires at the end of the year. There is also internal pressure from anti-US Sadrists and others to take a hard line during negotiations. There is the matter of "saving face," I guess, in the country and Arab World at large.
But these matters really do pale in comparison with the grand effort and expenditure of blood and treasure made by the US in overthrowing a brutal tyrant and building a stable democracy in the Arab heartland; one that can maintain order, defend its borders, and develop a prosperous economy with opportunities unheard of during the reign of Saddam Hussein. And absent the intimidation, torture, imprisonment, and mass graves.
All this against overwhelming odds that included a divided nation with one major party committed to undermining its country for political gain (the one, in case you weren't sure, that is assembled currently in Denver). There was also a hostile media and an antagonistic international community, UN, and Arab/Moslem world deeply opposed to the effort. And then the little matter of Hussein loyalists, Baathists, al-Qaeda, Sadrists, the Shiite-Sunni split, and an incipient civil war. Finally, there was (truth be told) an incompetent Bush administration, particularly the President himself and then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, both of whom misread the situation and planned miserably.
But despite all this, the nation held, the Military performed, the so called "surge" led by General David Petraeus was implemented (after three years of chaos), and America prevailed.
No one talks now about defeat or surrender in Iraq. No one calls for a precipitous American withdrawal (not even Barack) or makes comparisons with Vietnam or uses the quagmire word (other than the fringe left and some Democrats). No one speaks very much of civil war, strife, and failure in Mesopotamia today.
While no one is recommending Bush roll out another "Mission Accomplished" banner again, many are quietly acknowledging that while the progress is fragile, there is now reason for hope, with an obvious upward trajectory that may very well result in a successful outcome, a stable, lawful, and thriving, democratic state in Iraq, an American ally, no less, in the Arab Middle East.
Mission accomplished, indeed. Another uniquely American victory. Despite the odds. Despite the unending calumny, betrayal, and blackmail. Despite a fractured electorate and a major party and its fellow travelers in the media doing everything possible to subvert and disgrace their country, lose a war, and usher in a new Vietnam syndrome.
Victory.
And, perhaps there will ultimately be an agreed upon American non-combat, support role, with US bases present on Iraqi soil, in the manner of South Korea, Japan, and Europe or a clause in the final agreement that allows for combat forces to be maintained in the event of unanticipated contingencies - notwithstanding the arrogant Maliki.
So who is the little schmuck in Baghdad making demands on the greatest nation in the history of the world? The country that has done everything to save his chestnuts and that of his nation?
Take a look at Afghan President Hamid Karzai. A real friend and ally. An unabashed admirer of Bush and the US. Even when surrounded by anti-American fanatics. He honors his and his nation's benefactor. Which is as it should be. Now there's a role model for the ingrate in Iraq.
In the meantime, could the obnoxious lout in Iraq show a little respect for the nation that saved his foolish ass?
- There are no comments.