Wednesday, June 30, 2004

The “mass hysterical lunacy” theory didn’t go over well with my left-leaning relatives out West. According to one of my many aunts, the Americans don’t starve for lunacy themselves, having invaded a “sovereign country” for no good reason, with the foolish notion that they would be greeted with “open arms”. I don’t relish getting into a pissing match with loved ones, so I’ll just post my brief response here and leave it at that.

Actually, the Americans have been largely greeted as liberators in Iraq. The risk to US soldiers now comes not from average Iraqis, but rather from foreign insurgents in the form of Al-Qaeda cells and a gaggle of radical Islamo-fascist terror groups looking to de-stabilize the transition to democracy. Iraqis readily acknowledge a sense of ambivalence towards the US presence there and the Americans respect that; Iraqis, by and large, are grateful for the efforts of American soldiers to keep the peace and insure stability, but they are anxious to take over their own affairs. That’s a perfectly understandable sentiment given the circumstances.

Looking back at all the pre-war hand-wringing by the liberal "Blame America First" crowd in North America, none of them augured the overwhelmingly positive developments in Iraq. The Vietnam quagmire they foresaw/hoped for never materialized. Instead, we see 90%+ of the country stable, the tyrant Saddam Hussein in a jail cell awaiting trial for crimes against humanity, a successful transfer of power from the Coalition Provisional Authority to an Iraqi transitional government just 15 months after the start of the invasion, and free elections due within the next year. I don't know about you, but I would call that a pretty successful "quagmire".

Then again, maybe we shouldn't have gone over there after all. Saddam Hussein was only torturing and killing droves of his own people. It was really none of our business, was it?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home