Was it Worth it?

Another editorial by the Journal/Sentinel on the war in Iraq. No surprises here.

It was two years ago today that U.S. troops moved across the border from Kuwait into Iraq and began the campaign of "shock and awe" that quickly led to the downfall of Saddam Hussein. The people of Iraq have been rescued from the predations of a cruel dictator, but the postwar occupation of Iraq has not been an unqualified success.

Define unqualified success. A war where we drop a few bombs, dust ourselves off and proclaim victory? No, Clinton tried that--his policies led to the 9/11 attack on U.S. soil. A war where there are no casualties? A war where everything (including the behavior of a highly unpredictable enemy) is planned, down to the minute? (I know highly rehearsed theatrical performances where everyone is 'on the same page' that could never achieve the level of an 'unqualified success' as defined by the J/S).

Actually, given all of the liberal hysteria at the outset of the war (there were going to be hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties, Saddam was going to unleash biological and chemical weapons--that he didn't have--on our troops, the 'Arab street' was going to rise up against America in unprecedented fury, and our imperialist arrogance was going to bring on more 9/11-style attacks)--NONE OF WHICH HAS COME TRUE--I think 'unqualified success' is a pretty good description.

I suspect that the Iraqi people, who are no longer subject to random torture and death might have a different definition of 'unqualified success'. Here's a post from Instapundit who quotes a post from an Iraqi blogger. Follow the link to read his entire post.

TWO YEARS LATER, WAS THE IRAQ WAR WORTH IT? Iraqi blogger Husayn Uthman writes:

So you ask me, Husayn, was it worth it. What have you gotten? What has Iraq acheived? These are questions I get a lot.

To may outsiders, like those who protested last year, who will protest today. This was a fools errand, it brought nothing but death and destruction. I am sheltered in Iraq, but I know how the world feels, how people have come to either love or hate Bush, as though heis the emobdiement of this war. As though this war is part of Bush, they forget the over twenty million Iraqis, they forget the Middle Easterners, they forget the average person on the street, the average man with the average dream.

Ask him if it was worth it. Ask him what is different. Ask him if he would go through it again, go ahead ask him, ask me, many of you have.

Now I answer you, I answer you on behalf of myself, and my countrymen. I dont care what your news tells you, what your television and newspapers say, this is how we feel. Despite all that has happened. Despite all the hurt, the pain, blood, sweat and tears. These two years have given us hope we never had.

Egyptian blogger Big Pharaoh comments: "I believe it should be published in newspapers worldwide. Reading about Husayn's feeling is special because he lost his cousin in the Hilla terrorist bombing."

posted at 12:17 PM by Glenn Reynolds

Was World War II an 'unqualified success'? If so, on what basis? I fear that, had the J/S Editorial Board been in charge during World War II, the Hitler party would still be in power and the Jewish race would have been exterminated from the face of the earth.

But there's more from the J/S...

Brushing aside the qualms of the United Nations, the Bush administration led an invasion of Iraq with the avowed purpose of ridding that country of weapons of mass destruction. The existence of the weapons had been attested to by the CIA and was endlessly cited by President Bush and others. Two years later, it has become a virtual certainty that those weapons did not exist at the time of the invasion.

Okay, where do I start? First of all, the J/S Editors seem to ignore the stunning New York Times article (quoted here in an earlier blog) that seems to suggest that WMD did exist and were carefully spirited out of the country during the early weeks of the war. Of course, you won't read ANYTHING about that in the pages of the Journal/Sentinel or on their editorial page.

Next, WMD was NEVER the sole reason for invading Iraq (which one might forget in the constant liberal drumbeat about WMD). President Bush had this to say in his radio address on March 15, 2003:

As diplomatic efforts continue, we must never lose sight of the basic facts about the regime of Baghdad.

We know from recent history that Saddam Hussein is a reckless dictator who has twice invaded his neighbors without provocation -- wars that led to death and suffering on a massive scale. We know from human rights groups that dissidents in Iraq are tortured, imprisoned and sometimes just disappear; their hands, feet and tongues are cut off; their eyes are gouged out; and female relatives are raped in their presence.

As the Nobel laureate and Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, said this week, "We have a moral obligation to intervene where evil is in control. Today, that place is Iraq." (emphasis mine)

We know from prior weapons inspections that Saddam has failed to account for vast quantities of biological and chemical agents, including mustard agent, botulinum toxin and sarin, capable of killing millions of people. We know the Iraqi regime finances and sponsors terror. And we know the regime has plans to place innocent people around military installations to act as human shields.

Read the text of the entire radio address here.

Third, even IF the WMD did not exist (a virtual impossibility, since Saddam used them on his own people--but let's make the argument, just for fun), EVERYONE on the face of the planet (including Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, the beloved United Nations, etc.) thought that they did.

People simply have to operate on the best information they have at the time to make decisions. "Analysis paralysis" is not a good characteristic for a world leader.

The Monday Morning Quarterback is always secure in his smug satisfaction that he is smarter, more savvy and more sophisticated than those folks actually out on the field, taking the hard knocks and making the split-second decisions (good and bad) required to win...but no one seriously would put the Monday Morning Quarterback out on a field during an actual game. Because we all know that would spell disaster.

Let's MOVE ON beyond this eternal harping about the causes for the war and look FORWARD to the policies that will help the future of Iraq become an 'unqualified success' for the people in that country and in the region. And recognize the value of President Bush's stubborn belief that ALL people in the world deserve independence and freedom from tyranny.

I believe that history will be the judge...

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty. - John F. Kennedy