Iraq—Five Years and Some Accounting

Five years into the costly Iraq War, the most compelling question is still the initial one: why? Why invade a nation that hadn’t attacked us and didn’t pose a credible threat to us? Why set the reckless and arrogant precedent of pre-emptive war?

The Bush administration has trundled out a series of reasons.

The initial reasoning went like this: Saddam Hussein is working on weapons of mass destruction that could threaten American interests. This reasoning was backed by Condi Rice’s statement that we don’t want the proof of Hussein’s WMD to be a “mushroom cloud” and Dick Cheney’s theory that even a 1% chance of a WMD attack justified invading and occupying Iraq.  Five years on, it’s become clear that the threat was significantly and intentionally exaggerated. As for Cheney’s “1% Rule,” such absolutism and arrogance cannot be taken seriously; can you imagine a world where every nation followed that doctrine?

A second reason involved the suggestion, made repeatedly by administration officials, that Iraq had some connection to al Qaeda and/or the 9/11 attacks. This suggestion has also been repudiated. Saddam’s secular Baathist Party was hostile to the sectarian fundamentalism of al Qaeda and vice-versa. No credible connection between Iraq and either 9/11 or al Qaeda has ever been uncovered.

A third reason is Bush’s alleged crusade to spread freedom and democracy to the Arab world. This is either the height of naivete, or the height of cynicism. Only a naive misunderstanding of how democracy takes hold and develops would lead one to honestly believe it could be imposed militarily on a fractious nation like Hussein’s Iraq. Only the most brazen cynicism would lead one to use freedom and democracy as rhetorical flourishes masking a cold economic and geopolitical calculation.

Considering the political costs of this invasion and occcupation—the elevation of Iran to regional supremacy, the sundering of the fragile truce between Iraq’s Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, the destabilization of the region and its oil exporting capacity, the loss of America’s moral authority, the erosion of American civil liberties—shouldn’t we be revisiting the real reasons behind what many consider the greatest strategic American foreign policy mistake ever?

And why do we as a nation continue to ignore the costs of this war for the Iraqi people? The tally of documented civilian deaths is approaching 90,000. The number of casualties is probably five to ten times that number. Between two and four million Iraqis have been displaced. Countless millions have been psychologically traumatized in Iraq, and an entire generation has been denied the progress and prosperity the war has delayed or destroyed.

Consider those human costs, and the real reason for the invasion takes on a truly questionable character.

The real reason for the invasion was to establish a front on which to fight al Qaeda and jihadism far from our own shores. President Bush has said as much, with hardly a ripple of reaction: “We will fight the terrorists overseas so we do not have to face them here at home.” We lost 3000 people on 9/11 when a conspiracy planned and executed by mostly Saudis operating in Afghanistan pierced our homeland. Now Iraq has lost 90,000+ and has been set back decades in its development while Bush literally kisses the cheeks and holds the hands of the Saudis, who, along with Exxon and friends, enjoy unprecedented profitability.

Wouldn’t it have made more sense to put even a fraction of the resources we’ve expended in Iraq into Afghanistan, where the Taliban is making a comeback, instead? Deposing Saddam was a noble and desirable goal; wiping out the entire Baath Party infrastructure was neither justified nor desirable, however, unless the real goal was to create anarchy for an extended period during which al Qaeda and its allied jihadists could be fought in a place of our choosing.

We chose Iraq as our battlefield, not as our enemy.

Meanwhile, we’ve suffered 4000 deaths and 40,000 serious injuries, and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz has estimated the eventual monetary cost of the war at three trillion dollars.

Can any reasonable person justify that kind of disproportionate and wrongly-targeted response?

One man who continues to call Iraq a just war is George Bush, whose ill-conceived and reckless use of force had at least one silver lining: the president, absent from combat when he had the chance, got to land a real live fighter jet onboard a real live aircraft carrier.

Mission accomplished, sir. That was one expensive photo op.

Newsprism

Related news satire at Timeless News

Note: This is not advocating withdrawal from Iraq. I’ve written about the conundrum that makes this war such a profound tragedy: it was immoral to invade in the first place, but it would be at least as immoral to withdraw before a stable Iraq emerges, which might be never.

Is Warrantless Wiretapping Warranted?

Congress and the White House are engaged in an ongoing struggle over the Executive Branch’s authority to perform surveillance without a search warrant. At stake: the Fourth Amendment and separation of powers on the one hand, and national security on the other.

Federal judges have already ruled warrantless wiretapping unconstitutional, though the case has yet to reach the Supreme Court, which has thus far refused to hear lawsuits challenging the wiretaps.

Congress allowed Bush’s wiretap program to go forward on a temporary basis last year, but that loophole has now lapsed, leading to the current showdown.

There is precedent for suspending Constitutional rights during time of war: President Roosevelt interned tens of thousands of Japanese Americans during World War II, and President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War, for example. President Bush has suspended habeas corpus and imprisoned American citizens indefinitely without benefit of counsel–which leads to a crucial question:

Is the War on Terror analogous to WWII or the Civil War?

Of course not. Compare the death tolls: 7431 and counting in the War on Terror, over 400,000 in WWII, over 600,000 in the Civil War. Compare the stakes: the possibility of occasional attacks on American targets vs. world domination by totalitarian dictators vs. the sundering of the American nation. Compare the enemy: a loosely organized band of radical jihadists vs. Axis Powers controlling huge swaths of Europe, Asia, North Africa and the Pacific vs. a determined Confederacy led by Robert E. Lee, a military genius rivaling Napoleon and Alexander.

The president has used the 9/11 attacks to take power from Congress, the courts, and the people. He already has an adequately cooperative Congress, a sympathetic Supreme Court, and the tools–including FISA–to protect us without weakening the Constitution or our civil liberties.

The Bill of Rights couldn’t be more clear:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The FISA Court already gives the president the authority to delay getting a warrant for three days and to hold court in secret. He’s already suspended habeas corpus, circumvented the Geneva Conventions, signed hundreds of signing statements undermining the separation of powers, and invaded Iraq without a declaration of war.

Are warrantless wiretaps warranted?

Hardly.

Newsprism.com

Bill of Rights Re-write

In a post-9/11 world, it just makes sense to update quaint documents like the Geneva Conventions and the Bill of Rights. The following is a draft of a new and improved Bill of Rights under consideration by the Bush administration, available for free to any US citizen (add $4.95 for shipping and handling) from that well-known PO Box in Pueblo, Colorado: 

The First Amendment–Under New Management with More Locations to Serve You
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; and just a few laws abridging the freedoms of speech and of the press; and maybe one or two little ones abridging the rights to peaceably assemble and petition the Government.

The Second Amendment–Absolutely, Positively, 100% Guaranteed* (*some restrictions apply)
The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed, except for people who oppose the infringement of their right to keep and bear Arms.

The Third Amendment–Only $19.95 with Free Continental Breakfast
No Soldier shall be quartered in any house without the consent of the Owner, but in a manner to be prescribed by law once all the discount motels are full.

The Fourth Amendment–Now with Lubrication for Easier Insertion
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects (excluding their wombs, genitals, brains, blood, lungs, anuses, closets, phones, and computers) against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, and particularly describing the place to be searched and destroyed, and the persons or things to be seized and devoured.

The Fifth Amendment–Flexible Coverage for Uncertain Times
No person shall be held to answer for a crime unless on an indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases involving public danger or public relations; nor shall any person be deprived of life, liberty, or private property without due process of law, except in times of actual, cultural, or rhetorical war.

The Sixth Amendment–No Money? No Credit? No Problem
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; and to purchase just as much Justice as he or she can afford.

The Seventh Amendment–Kiss Lady Liberty’s Scales and Place Your Bet
In suits at common law where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, even if some fool wants millions for spilling hot coffee in her own lap.

The Eighth Amendment-Because Too Much Is Never Enough
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted, except by the military, and on reality television.

The Ninth Amendment–Your Donation May Be Tax Deductible
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, unless the people really, truly, honest-to-God don’t care.

The Tenth Amendment–Self Serve Only. Some Assembly Required.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people; but only if the people hunker down and fight like hell!

Newsprism.com