Which is why many in the Republican campaign horrify me. You wonder why I've mentioned it is conceivable I could vote for Obama? As much as I don't trust our president, he at least seems like he doesn't want the blame for losing Iraq or Afghanistan, and is willing to go through the motions of winning. Our military and State Department might use that opportunity to really win. Fake it until you make it.
Some who would take his place seem to embrace losing. I'll hope others can stop President Obama's domestic agenda if I can hope he will move the war forward more than his opponent in the general election. I hope that isn't my choice. But the war is my priority. You go to the polls on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November with the candidates you have, and not the candidates you wish you had.
But I digress.
Then Diehl writes this:
Iraq, however, looks a lot like what Syria, and much of the rest of the Arab Middle East, might hope to be. Its vicious dictator and his family are gone, as is the rule by a sectarian minority that required perpetual repression. The quasi-civil war that raged five years ago is dormant, and Iraq’s multiple sects manage their differences through democratic votes and sometimes excruciating but workable negotiations. Though spectacular attacks still win headlines, fewer people have died violently this year in Iraq than in Mexico — or Syria.
Just as significantly, Iraq remains an ally of the United States, an enemy of al-Qaeda and a force for relative good in the Middle East. It is buying $12 billion in U.S. weapons and has requested that an American training force remain in the country next year. It recently helped get two U.S. citizens out of prison in Iran.
All of this happened because the United States invaded the country. Saddam Hussein demonstrated how he could handle a homegrown, Arab Spring-style rebellion when he used helicopter gunships to slaughter masses of Shiites in 1991. Even had his regime somehow crumbled, without the presence of U.S. troops nothing would have stopped Iraq from spiralling into the bottomless sectarian conflict that now threatens Syria.
The Arab Spring, in short, is making the invasion of Iraq look more worthy — and necessary — than it did a year ago. Before another year has passed, Syrians may well find themselves wishing that it had happened to them.
What the heck? Is he guest-blogging here?
Yeah, a lot of people opposed to the war said even if Saddam was that bad we should have supported insurrection. Of course, the collateral damage from our tentative Libya intervention was greater than in Iraq (see the UPDATE portion) where we directly intervened, I say.
Iraq was tougher than I thought it would be. For a lot of reasons that I've gone into before. But we needed to do it to break the Arab winter of despair even apart from the reasons to get rid of Saddam's regime. The Arab Spring is showing how difficult it is for people power--even with that magical Twitter--to change an oppressive system. Although the Arab Spring will have lots of steps back for every step forward, only getting things moving can make things better in the long run.
In twenty years, we may have more friendly allies in the Middle East struggling to understand and live by democratic systems and rule of law. Just be prepared for some ugly periods over the next ten. And keep working the problems. That's the only way to make sure movement is a net forward gain.
