Botched Occupation? Well, yes.

Scott links to this article about the occupation of Iraq. Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe contrasts the occupation of Iraq to our ocuparion of post-war Germany in early 1946, I suppose with the intent of convincing us that we should sit back and watch our Iraqi occupation similarly succeed. I would point out two major differences between Germany and Iraq: Germany had just been defeated in a European war that lasted 6 years and devastated most of Europe and much of North Africa. Germany had invaded her neighbors and attempted to conquer all of Europe. Iraq’s only military offense was to invade one small country that could arguably be considered historically a part of Iraq. And, I don’t recall hundreds of American soldiers being killed and wounded in Germany in the months following the German surrender.

I’m not advocating that we abandon Iraq. We’re there, and thanks to the bullheaded policies of the Bush administration, we’re there alone in a very screwed-up situation (I could also point out the other major difference between Germany circa 1946 and Iraq 2003 – the presence and support of major allies). But trying to make us feel better about this mess by reminding us of postwar Germany is ludicrous. Yes, we have to stay, and we’ll bear most, if not all, of the ever-escalating cost of this boondoggle. And in November 2004, we need to fire the man who put us there.

November 8, 2003 В· Harry В· 6 Comments
Posted in: Politics

6 Responses

  1. scott - November 9, 2003

    Fire the one person, as far as the record of history and principle are concerned, who has the greatest stake in making Iraq work? If we have to be there (and we do), why not let the person who started it finish it? If we elect a Democrat next term, I submit we would put America in a worse position than it’s already in, because the Democrat has no personal responsibility associated with Iraq. The spin would look like this: If it fails, well, “it’s that ignorant Bush’s fault”. If it succeeds, “Boy, we sure cleaned up Bush’s mess”.

    There is a sore lack of personal responsibility in America today. Wouldn’t it be novel if we started expecting it of our elected leaders? I’m sick of spin. I say give Bush a chance to succeed or fail.

  2. Harry - November 9, 2003

    So, by your logic, if somebody has really screwed up a multimillion dollar project, you should leave that person there? Maybe they can screw up more projects, right? My take is, Bush has had his chance. We’ll be dealing with the aftereffects of his policies for years, maybe decades. I think we need to start that “after” part sooner rather than later.

  3. scott - November 10, 2003

    As a matter of fact, there is still a whole year left on Bush’s chance, v1.0. And we don’t know for sure that Bush has screwed up yet. If there is not a much better situation in Iraq in a year, then, yeah, I think it is safe to say Iraq has become Daikatana. Right now, it’s too soon to tell. And too soon to call for firing anybody, except maybe his PR folks.

  4. Brian S - November 13, 2003

    While I won’t debate the situation may be ‘screwed-up’ the alone part isn’t really correct. Notably missing from the list below are Germany and France, also Russia and China have not gotten directly involved but that could be at our request or for their own reasons.

    Full list of coalition countries: (As of Tuesday, 18 March, 2003)

    Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and Uzbekistan.

    Source: US State Department

  5. Harry - November 13, 2003

    WOW!! Man, if the wolves were at the door, I’d *definitely* want the Lithuanian Army holding my back!!! Reassured am I!!!

  6. Brian S - November 13, 2003

    Don’t mess with the Pole’s!