But, What Does That Mean?

Dafydd ab Hugh does an extensive analysis of the preliminary assessment of Iraq’s benchmarks, and he (not surprisingly) reaches a far different conclusion from that of the mainstream media. The whole post is worth reading, even if your political bent doesn’t match that of Dafydd’s.

In the comments, “Big D” mentions a response from Harry Reid to a question from a news reporter, in which Reid said, “Clearly the Iraqis don’t want us there.” Big D gives no sources, and he admits the Q&A recap he gives is paraphrased, but I’ve heard several people say that when defending the withdrawal: The Iraqis don’t want us there.

That’s almost certainly true, but is it enough to justify a withdrawal? Here’s an analogy for you. My grandfather had a stroke on Sunday of this week. I don’t want him in the hospital. I want him to be at home, on his farm, working with his cattle. But in his current condition, simply pulling him out of the hospital, away from the therapy and the other treatments, would make things worse. I don’t want him in the hospital, but I don’t want to simply take him out, either. I want him to be ready to come home.

That’s why saying that the Iraqis don’t want us there is almost devoid of meaning. They don’t want us there, but what do they want? Almost certainly, they would rather that there was no need for our soldiers to be there (for that matter, I would rather there was no such need, as well), but that doesn’t mean they simply want us to leave immediately. Do they want the previous status quo restored? Some of them might, but even if they do, that simply is not an option. Do they want a new, healthy, free country? Well, pulling our troops out isn’t going to make that happen.

We’ve been told there is no military solution, and I believe that’s partially true. I also don’t believe the Bush administration striving for a military solution. A “military solution” would simply be bombing the enemy into oblivion, which is not what we are trying to do. The administration is striving for a political solution, and in order to provide enough safety and stability to make a political solution possible, the military is needed.

Our politicians need to stop looking for immediate gain for themselves and start looking at the actual consequences of their actions. Pulling our troops out now only helps the politicians who vote for that. It will almost certainly plunge Iraq into total chaos, costing more lives than I care to guess at. It will embolden Al Quaida, Iran, North Korea, and every other country/faction in the world that wants to destroy us. It will bring us shame, that we attacked a country and destroyed its government (arguably necessarily) and then left its people, who relied on that government (corrupt and evil as it was) to help keep the peace.

I’m sick of politicians on both sides of America’s political spectrum trying to give us these bumper-sticker soundbites as though the soundbites themselves contain an answer. “There is no military solution” is not the same as “There is no solution in which the military plays a necessary part.” “They don’t want us there” doesn’t mean “They want us to leave right now,” and it’s dishonest of anyone to equate the two.