Thursday, November 14, 2024
43.0°F

Iraqi Freedom: When, how and if

| May 3, 2007 11:00 PM

Let's talk about Iraq. Just over four years ago, we initiated a war against the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein and his thugs. Unfortunately, it was for the wrong reasons, fought the wrong way and once the maneuver warfare portion of the battle was concluded, we were totally unprepared to deal with the imperatives of maintaining civil order, rebuilding the country's infrastructure and offering the Iraqi people a reasonable running start at establishing a prosperous and stable society.

The costs of this conflict have been a national tragedy — over 3,300 U.S. military killed with an additional 23,000-plus wounded — nearly 1,000 of those amputees, and at a cost of about 400 billion dollars. The Iraqis have lost over 54,000 of their own citizens. At the same time, our failed presence in Iraq has emboldened terrorists worldwide and dramatically increased the number of those committed Islamic jihadists who are dedicated to pursuing our annihilation.

Additionally, they have kept us from finishing the job in Afghanistan, severely limited our ability to properly respond to the real and dramatic threats posed by Iran and North Korea, stressed the capability of our ground forces beyond their reasonable limits and brought our national credibility into question on a global scale.

The facts are clear here, and having once served as the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East responsible for enforcing the no-fly zone over southern Iraq, I do not recite them with any pleasure or lack of patriotism.

Indeed, it is a love and respect for the principles of this great nation that compel me to tell it like it is. Brutal and despicable human being that he was, there were no WMDs and Saddam had no prospect of getting any soon — period. And no, he did not hide them so well that we cannot find them. And no again, he did not move them to the Lebanon's Bekaa Valley.

Anyone who tells you differently will doubtless claim to enjoy an ongoing relationship with Elvis, which admittedly is more likely. Moreover, there was no relationship of any significance between Saddam Hussein and global terrorists. Saddam was a secular ruler and about as compatible with Islamic fundamentalism as fire is to gasoline. They hated one another.

There you have it, water over the dam that will provide fodder for pundits, historians, "talking heads" and politicians for years to come.

Meanwhile, we have a huge problem — a very huge problem. What do we do now?

Our options are few, and not very attractive. The precipitous withdrawal advocated by some (including our Congress) virtually guarantees a failed Iraqi state, unmitigated civil war, and a mark in the "win" column for global terrorists who are now engaged there — a huge disaster for U.S. national security. Iraq would become the hotbed of terrorism some incorrectly thought it was four years ago — except far worse. And make no mistake here, the terrorists will come after us with all the horrific weapons of death and destruction at their disposal and none of us will be safe — not in New York, not in LA, not in Chicago, and no, not even in Montana.

The stakes are very high. It may well be that we are doomed to fail in Iraq and chaos there and the entire Middle East is inevitable. However, if we believe the judgments of our senior military leaders, and I do, it may also be that we have one last opportunity to prevent Iraq from becoming a perpetual incubator of terrorism aimed directly at our hearts. It may be that we can avoid the threat to the global economy, which, like it or not, is dependent on ready access to Mideast oil. It may be that we can avoid further destabilization of the Middle East with all the nasty potential consequences that would bring for the United States.

I prefer to believe in the "surge" recommendation General David Petraeus provided the Senate Armed Services Committee during his January 2007 confirmation hearing to become the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq. I must assume they believed him too, as he was confirmed by the U.S. Senate shortly thereafter on January 26 with a unanimous vote of 81 to 0. Our best option at this juncture is to pursue a sustainable surge of 30,000 troops in Iraq, or a few more if needed, which may enable us to establish an acceptable security environment in that country and thereby buy enough time for the Maliki government to establish some level of cooperation between the warring Iraqi religious factions. Should Maliki fail to meet this imperative-it is game, set and match-and we must withdraw our forces, try as best we can to recast and reformulate our regional presence, and in the generations ahead do our best to cope with the mess we caused and were unable to clean up. And no, contrary to some members of Congress, we must not assist and embolden our enemy with any set timetable for withdrawal of our forces. The last thing we need is 535 members of the Congress who suddenly think they are the Command-in-Chief. At the same time, it must be clear to the Iraqis that this is not a never-ending commitment. To the contrary, we are in the final stages of the military effort and if it does not succeed in the months ahead, we must withdraw and suffer the consequences. In short, we have a chance to succeed, and given the stakes, we cannot afford not to take it.

Lastly, as citizens, we could contribute a great deal to our troops if we would insist that our political leaders deal with this crisis from a basis of our national security interests, and not the political fortunes of any political party or office holder. Our solders, sailors, airmen and marines deserve better than they are getting from politicians who sadly put service to their own political interests above service to the nation.

Don Loranger

Bigfork, MT

In 1995, Major General Loranger served as the Commander, Joint Task Force Southwest Asia, which was responsible for enforcing the "no fly" zone over southern Iraq.

Support SB300

I'd like to endorse Janet Loranger's earlier letter to the editor in support of Senate Bill 300 which allows police to stop drivers who are not wearing seat belts nor have their children properly secured. Mrs. Loranger made a powerful case about the terrible costs incurred by children, families, and indeed all of us who neglect or willfully flaunt the law requiring the use of seat belts in a moving vehicle.

Like her, I find the comments of Rep. John Sinrud, (R)-Bozeman appalling and destructive. For an elected, supposedly responsible, representative of the people to write off enforcement of a life-saving law with the statement: "When it's your time, it's your time" is deeply disappointing. His statement is clearly an example of irresponsibility that must be challenged.

Representative Sinrud, according to you apparently there is no need for a fire department, a police department, or even an army. What purpose does having a system of laws and law enforcers add to a society if all our fates are: "what will be will be"

But for those of us who believe there is a need to protect unbelted drivers, children, and other innocent victims and to enforce driving laws and order, let's use our heads and our hearts and our God-given intellect to fully support Senate Bill 300.

Patricia Clark

Bigfork

Stop hate crimes

On March 16th, a Columbia Falls man was attacked and brutally beaten in his driveway. The man's jaw, nose, eye sockets, and ankle were shattered. His nostril was ripped, two bones in his feet were broken, his palate was cracked, and his septum damaged. This man was assaulted because his attacker found out he was gay.æ

Regardless of whether you believe people are born or choose to be gay and regardless of your religious beliefs, no one deserves to be assaulted, taunted, hurt, or degraded because of their sexual orientation.

Because anti-gay hate crimes attack a person's identity, they have more serious psychological impacts on the victim than do differently motivated crimes. Anti-gay hate crimes send a message to the entire gay and lesbian community. They send the message that all gays and lesbians are unwelcome and unsafe. According to a study by the Washington Institute for Mental Illness Research and Training, hate crimes are committed by people who see little wrong with their actions and may even believe that these actions are sanctioned by society. This dynamic doesn't just apply to adults who commit hate crimes against the gay community. We also see it in Montana schools.

Young people who bully their gay peers also believe that their victims deserve it and that the larger community agrees with them. Neither being bullied nor bullying in school should be treated simply a "rite of passage;" it has lasting implications on the bully and the victim. Studies on bullying show that a bully's anti-social behavior is not limited to school but continues in other settings and into adulthood. Approximately 60% of boys who were classified by researchers as bullies in grades six through nine were convicted of at least one crime by the age of 24. In other words, violent, anti-social kids, more often than not, grow up to be violent, anti-social adults. Thus, bullying prevention is crime prevention.

Children and teens who self-identify as gay, or are perceived as being gay, are disproportionately targeted by bullies. Gay and lesbian youth are five times more likely than their straight counterparts to miss school out of fear and three times more likely to commit suicide. The Montana Legislature has chosen to forgo the opportunity to include sexual orientation as a protected class in human rights law despite countless incidents in the state of discrimination, violence, and harassment against the gay and lesbian community. Similarly, though the Montana Board of Public Education understands the harassment and bullying of gay and lesbian students to be a significant problem in Montana schools, too many local school districts do not address this problem in their anti-bullying policies.

The victim of the Columbia Falls attack endured bullying throughout middle and high school and, at one point, felt so threatened that he brought a gun to school for self-protection. No student should have to take such a drastic measure to access their education. Bullying and being bullied is not just something that every kid has to go through. It's not harmless and it often doesn't end at graduation. It is one phase in the lifecycle of abuse and violence. Just as Montana law should protect its citizens, Montana schools should protect its students. By refusing to extend this protection to a subset of our community that experiences consistent discrimination and violence, we compromise every Montanan's safety, rights, and freedoms. æ

If you would like to learn more about how to create safer school environments, please contact the Montana Human Rights Network at 442-5506.

Rebecca Leinberger is an Organizer with the Montana Human Rights Network. æ