On Iraq

We’re as polarized as we’ve ever been about Iraq. Why can’t we just admit that we were snookered by the Bush administration and then decide what we owe the people of Iraq now that we’ve stepped in and changed the regime. The “liberals” may argue that the war wasn’t necessary. Well, so what? We’re in there now. What do we do about it? We can’t very well bomb a country into the stone ages, drive out an admittedly horrible tyrant, and then sit back and watch to see what happens. We owe a debt to the Iraqi people to help them rebuild their country and to attempt to create a new government that allows them all to have the freedom to pursue their lives and happiness unhindered by tyranny.

But the neocons shouldn’t get up on their white horses and praise the administration for getting rid of Saddam – That is, unless, we’re willing to go to war with every dictator and tyrant in the world. Can’t do it? Not feasible? Then shut up about how noble we are for going into Iraq. The only reasons we attacked Iraq had more to do with the posturing and chest thumping of two world leaders with equal egos and mismatched firepower than they had anything to do with justice or equity. Sure, getting rid of Saddam might be a good idea in retrospect, but that’s like saying, “I’m glad I exposed my son to Chicken Pox at 4 so that he wouldn’t get them at twenty.” Or “In retrospect I’m glad I didn’t get up and go to work this morning because I might have had a wreck.” We know that Saddam was a bad guy. What we won’t know for years, and perhaps forever, is whether our “intervention” has ultimately made things worse or better.

Even so. We’ve done it. Now we all (American, Iraqi, and the rest of the world) have to work with it. God be with us all.