As Iraq Descends

Before I rediscovered my classical liberal outlook, I wallowed around aimlessly (it turns out) between the traditional red and blue camps. I sat and listened to the narrative confined to a box set by top men.

So it was with Iraq. The arguments for invasion were put forth eloquently enough that I figured this time the Americans were gonna do it right. Their political interests merged with their moral visions of a free Iraq. Fix Iraq, stabilize the region seemed to be the big picture argument and it made sense to me.

But as some pointed out, you can't do stuff like that and it did give pause. Among all conservative (and even liberal) pundits, the only one who was against military invasion (to this very day) was Pat Buchanan. For his troubles, he too was chastised for his lack of patriotism.

Buchanan saw a modern Vietnam, whereas classical historians like Victor Davis Hanson saw a changing world. Indeed, I too thought we had arrived at a historical crossroads where the U.S. was going to finally bring peace, prosperity and democracy to a country that had an educated, seemingly willing population - to say nothing of its rich cultural heritage and history.

Of all the countries in the region, Iraq was the one that seemed primed for a-changin'.

This time the Americans were going to do it right.

They didn't. Not necessarily because they're failures but the task was to gigantic to handle. Americans are not specialists in building diverse countries from scratch. And that's fine. No country really is; except for perhaps the British but they too were imperfect having to face the full force of local customs and history eventually overcome imperialism and colonialism.

The invasion of Afghanistan was justifiable. Few people were against it. Most countries knew that was the Medussa's head but Iraq was more complicated. There's no doubt the country had chemical weapons and it's very possible Hussein would have increased his lust for more destructive weapons. Links to terrorist organizations were around too. But if the U.S. wanted to put an end to countries who housed such entities, the biggest, baddest of all those countries was Iran. I suppose the thinking was secure Iraq and keep Iran in check because you can't invade the latter without major global implications.

Bah.

I think I'll quit here because a flood of thoughts are overcoming me too numerous to coherently jot down here.

The point of this was to highlight given the recent troubles in Iraq, it's amazing to think (maybe ironically?) this was once the 'cradle of civilization' (I can see Hanson's position viewed from this light) home to so many legendary and historical dynasties and empires including Sumerian, Babylonian, and Parthian.  It was 'supposed' to be a discussion on that.

Alas.

Tangents.