Chan Lowe: The end of combat operations in Iraq

Tuesday night, President Obama gave just about the only speech that could have been given to properly mark the transition of America’s role in Iraq.
He sounded like the maid stuck with cleaning up a hotel room the morning after it has been rented by a rock band. There really wasn’t much to say about the whole endeavor that was positive, except that our troops did their jobs superlatively. The whole subject is uncomfortable for us, because while our service members did their duty and in many cases made the supreme sacrifice, we’re at a loss to know what they did it for.
We’re at a loss because our leaders violated the sacred pact the civilian leadership has always had with the military: We will ask you to go into harm’s way on behalf of your country, and in return you can have faith that we will only ask you to do so if the cause is worthy, if the mission is clear-cut, and if it has a reasonable chance of success.
We went in because they said there were WMD. Well, there weren’t any. Then it was about democracy, and we “surged” to give the Iraqis time to form a government. They still haven’t formed one. The place is a hair’s-breadth away from anarchy.
We had intentions of building a Western-oriented Arab bulwark in the Middle East. The only thing the Iranians will lack after the last Americans leave is an engraved invitation to invade.
Americans like to win wars, particularly after they’ve spent a trillion borrowed dollars when there are pressing needs at home. With Iraq, there is no surrender at Yorktown, no signing ceremony on the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri, just a fizzling-out.
Years from now, after the accursed place recedes into painful memory, it will probably revert to what it was before: a dusty crossroads ruled by whichever warlord among its contentious populace happens to be the most ruthless.




CHAN LOWE has been the Sun Sentinel’s first and only editorial cartoonist for the past twenty-six years. Before that, he worked as cartoonist and writer for the Oklahoma City Times and the Shawnee (OK) News-Star.
Comments
Well...at least YOU know the real reason behind the invasion. A friendly Arab nation (bulwark is a nice term) in the heart of the Middle East would have been a boon...too bad we forgot that Jeffersonian Democracy could never work in a Muslim culture.
Posted by: This Guy | September 2, 2010 6:36 AM
I hate to say it, but I think the real reason for Prince George's misadventure in Iraq is that he has always had Daddy issues. The waste and sorrow left by his disastrous means of handling his inner demons stains us all.
Posted by: No-T | September 2, 2010 3:53 PM