
Since the Obama campaign people are seemingly having difficulty answering the question of whether or not the so called surge has worked, we thought we’d off the following as a possible response. Perhaps the surge was simply cover for what was in the process of happening anyway in Iraq. Perhaps the Iraqis were getting tired of the bombings, the attacks in their own neighborhoods, the surety of continued occupation of American troops as long as the violence persisted. Sure, one could point to the statistics of attacks falling off dramatically with the infusion of more American forces, but that is no proof that cooler heads would have not prevailed had we decided to pull the plug and redeployed elsewhere.
Driven by the narrative of the mainstream media, many have been convinced that John McCain’s wisdom of coming up with a plan to win the war in Iraq with sufficient troops in place is what turned things around. In our opinion, this line of thinking has been allowed to flourish simply because there is no real consistent on the street coverage being obtained and reported by the US mainstream media. They are simply regurgitating the same old verbiage they get from an incestuous process that feeds its self.
Since we get so little independent international news coverage in this country due to budget constraints little can be verified to be able to concretely state that any such action on the US’s part had any particular effect.
When addressing John McCain’s claims of staying until we have total victory in Iraq, we must state the fact that Iraq has already been lost, whether or not anybody wants to admit it. We rationalize our findings as such: When the United States was forced to cave on the SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) we effectively lost control of the country of Iraq the moment we leave in large numbers. That agreement was the only thing that would have kept bases open, control of the Iraqi airspace, and access to their oil fields by western oil companies. Additionally, that agreement would have provided US troops and contractors immunity from prosecutions of war crimes from the occupation. With the United States contemplating or being forced to exit without these protections, it hard to believe the United States won anything considering how much blood and treasure has been invested in the madness.
Want more?, No problem; Since the Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is a Shiite, leading a Shiite majority and has been very friendly with their Shiite neighbors in Iran (our stated enemy) and they too want to see the US leave the region as well, we’d like to know how that smacks of victory even if every Al Qaeda element was eradicated from Iraq.
The only thing we have accomplished when all is said and done is strengthen the Iran’s hand in their neighborhood, by eliminated their only major threat, while expanding the Iranian’s sphere of influence. The fact of the matter is, without getting access to the oil; being able to establish permanent bases where we wanted to stay within easy striking distance of our foes and diminishing our worldwide reputation in the process, we see nothing to call victory by any stretch of the imagination. That our friend is the brutal truth.
No matter how the mainstream media or the government tries to spin this lunacy, we lost this conflict. Beside, how do you claim victory in a war that should have never been fought. Perhaps a small victory can be viewed if the United States in not saddled with high reparations to pay and can gets off without being charged with war crimes against humanity.
Hell, it is conceivable that this very nation that we have fought so hard to free from a tyrant could prove to be our foe one day in the foreseeable future. Only the next time they will be fighting alongside Iran. Crazy Huh!
And as for John McCain’s so called wisdom concerning this winning surge strategy trumping Barack Obama’s vote against the war, we are reminded of the old adage, smart people find solutions to tough problems, while wise people find ways to avoid them in the first place.