Boots on the Ground

I believe that the greatest objections raised against Operation Iraqi Freedom were the uncertainty of the outcome. We heard grave projections of a Stalingrad siege of Baghdad with losses in the tens of thousands. We have all heard the meme that a war can not be won by air power alone, and the Baathist regime certainly understood this when they chose to garrison half the state operations in underground bunkers. Now after notable failures such as Somalia, it was abundantly clear to some, and certainly bin Laden and his minions that the US could not weather the domestic politics of a ground invasion, that the casualties would be to great for the American public to bear. Now I think that this notion has been roundly defeated, in spite of the tremendous efforts of the Left wing of American politics and it’s actors.

I haven’t embraced the concept of ‘Nation-Building’ and I don’t think most conservatives have. Iraq is a special case because it represents the unfinished business of the Bush I administration. If we invaded Basra and pummeled the regime into the dirt it would have been up to the ‘International-Community’ to pick up the pieces. The concern that Iraq would fall into the hands of Iran was a good sell back then but kicking the can down the road gave us 12 years of Saddam’s genocide and the rise of a truly fascist regime in Iran. The stakes are higher than ever. If Iran crosses the Rubicon there will be no nation building. One could hope quite the opposite, who threatens Iran now?

Now to the point in case. If ‘boots on the ground’ were absolutely necessary in Iraq to eject the Baathist government, provided that it could be accomplished, what to do with the remnants of the Iraqi government in its stead? I think this is where Powell most famously said; “You break it, you buy it”. If that is so, what do you do, you prop it up on its own, brush it off, give it a few lessons on democracy (CPA), then send them on their way.

The U.S. set about to democratize Iraq as a remedy and to make a positive example out of what was largely an affront to the ‘Arab street’. Nation building is a rationalization born in the practicality of a particular Iraqi predicament more than it is policy of future world political conquest. May it serve as a shining light for the brave generations of the future.

The best way to deal with tyrants is to tell them what you expect of them, give them a chance to reform, and failing that, give them a dose of medicine. Occasionally, you have to ‘show them the implements of torture’ to get their attention. Unfortunately, with the vast schism in the United States, regimes like Iran’s new president don’t think the U.S. has the necessary resolve. The lesson must be re-taught until rote memorization sinks in. I would hope that the upcoming showdown with Iran would be resolved by strictly bombing Iran into smithereens, but I am afraid that is chances of going regional, or global are substantial.

Hamas
I think if we’re to believe in democracy at all we must be willing to suffer the consequences when political-terrorist organizations are popularly elected. For those of us who have known that the Palestinians were ‘scorpions’ it should come to little surprise, but for the Europeans who were convinced otherwise, this may be shocking news.

Again I think we can be glad that democracy is working in Palestine. The United States is hamstrung on the Iranian issue for precisely the fact that the Mullahs are unpopular and, it would seem, that the peoples will has been thwarted. Palestine prayers have been answered in Hamas. I know for myself, I will not have a shred of regret when they, the Palestinian people, are bombed into the Stone Age, alright, into something before the Stone Age.

So will Hamas change its’ stripes and embrace the opportunity for peace or does the Road-Map lead to a dead end? As is so often told, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. We’ll see.