The War in Iraq

I have been reading numerous posts on the Internet regarding the war in Iraq and I am troubled that this issue is being used to drive a wedge between political segments in the United States.
First, I would like to remind people that the difference between the political right and left in this country is so small as to be virtually non-existent. For example, what is really the difference between the W. Bush presidency and the Clinton presidency? Both passed free trade agreements, sent our troops to fight overseas, lowered taxes and favored welfare reform. The biggest differences seem to be Supreme Court Justices and the current inability to cut spending. If you still don’t believe me, think about this; we consider California our most liberal state, but until the recent national moratorium, California regularly executed prisoners. Yet, in Europe, Turkey’s application to the EU was held up because they still perform capital punishemnt.
The groups that are blaming the war on Bush are using nothing but revisionist history. The only reason Democrats are against the war is because a Republican president started it. If Al Gore had won the 2000 election, we still would have gone into Iraq. After all, Bill Clinton made a speech in 1999 warning the American people that we may have to invade Iraq because of Saddam Hussein’s refusal to follow United Nations protocols following the Gulf War. And virtually every Democrat in Congress voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq.
There is no doubt in my mind that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. I made the same argument in 2003 leading up to the war, but people thought I was some kind of anti-American pinko. Needless-to-say, I feel vindicated by the ensuing events.
The real problem with the War in Iraq is its length. At five plus years, it is already our third longest war behind Vietnam and the American Revolution. As Shelby Foote noted in the 1950’s, Americans like their wars short and vigorous. This war has been neither.
But we should never forget why this war began and why it is ongoing. No matter what the Bush administration says, there were two essential reasons why we went into Iraq: because Hussein refused the follow the U.N. directives, and because we wanted to trade the Iraqis TV’s, computers and cars in exchange for oil.
And the reason we are still in Iraq is because, after the fall of Saddam and his regime, insurgents continued to fight. If the insurgents had simply been smart enough to bide their time, we would have left and they could have created all the mischief they wanted without interference from the U.S. military.
But at the same time, the insurgents realized that the United States had gotten itself into a lose-lose situation. Nation building is a quaint notion that only works if the people of said nation are in favor of it. You can’t force somebody to want something; they have to get there on their own. The current situation in Iraq reminds me of the old saying, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
And there is no way to end terrorism. Terrorists have existed at least since the time of the Romans and will continue to exist ad infinitum. So no matter when we leave, the insurgents will crow that they ran us out. And if we stay forever, the insurgents will say we have proved their point about being an occupying army.
But I must digress. There is nothing to be accomplished by vilifying those with opposing views of the war. Saying one side is murdering liars and the other side is unpatriotic terrorist sympathizers only builds ill feeling between Americans who would otherwise get along. I realize this is a basic failing of a democracy, or in our case a representative republic. If one side favors an issue that can be made controversial, the other side opposes it with all the rhetoric at their disposal in order to drum up votes. The United States would be better off if we would simply put our heads together to think of a way to try to save face in a seemingly impossible situation rather than defaming our political opponents. But that would be putting the good of your country ahead of the good of your political party, something that is very rare in the United States of America.