Monday, February 25, 2008

Justification Of War And Destruction Of Man And Machine

A war is waged in a country most have never been to. The year is 1990. The division began when George Herbert Walker Bush executed air strikes in the fall in an attempt to liberate Kuwait from an invasion by Iraq. Sanctions were initially tried, but when Iraq refused compliance military efforts were used. By March of 1991 troops were being pulled from the Gulf region as objectives were thought to have been reached.

In 2003 George W. Bush had taken the oath of President and had been in the White House for most of his first term. The Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had not been in compliance with United Nations policy for inspections and American Intelligence had concluded that there were weapons of mass destruction on Iraqi soil.

One by one fugitive Iraqi leaders were placed in custody and a coalition of forces worked to liberate Iraq from the grip of what had been described as an 'oppressive regime'.

American forces worked with Iraqi citizens to develop a police force. Elections were held, yet two issues stood between the start of the war and a graceful exit. The issues were that no specific weapons of mass destruction were located and suicide bombers made if very difficult to ensure a modicum of stability in the newly liberated country.

A broad contingent of prominent Americans sought the impeachment of President Bush, while there were similar impeachment requests for Vice President Dick Cheney. The charges against the President and Vice-President stemmed from the war in Iraq.

There are those that have felt that the role of America should have involved ongoing sanctions and diplomacy in the midst of the conflict in the Middle East, but there were also a number of war supporters who felt there was enough justification to proceed with the war.

Many of those who supported the President felt that if we did not take action the war might come to American soil. This thought was obviously related to the September 11th attack directed by Osama bin Laden of Afghanistan. Nearly 3,000 Americans were killed as a result of a terrorist attack using hijacked aircraft as instruments of terror. Intelligence indicated a likely link between bin Laden and Hussein.

While some thought that this new threat made the liberation of Iraq something that must be achieved others simply viewed the invasion as misguided at best and unwinnable at worst.

Conflicting reports were fodder for water cooler discussions. News reports pointed to losses and low morale among the troops. However, email reports from soldiers often pointed to what they felt were successes in the gulf.

At the fifth anniversary of the occupation of Iraq the controversy surrounding the world's involvement in this country remains clouded by what the President and his advisors may or may not have known about Iraq prior to the start of the war.

Some who survived Viet Nam considered a victory in Iraq to be as unachievable as the war they fought in the 1960's and 1970's. Others have consistently viewed the threat in Iraq to have been strong enough to merit long-term attention.

Was the war in Iraq justified? If so, is there a meaningful exit strategy? If not then who is to blame for leading America into a costly war that resulted in significant additional loss of life among American soldiers?