One of the commenters the other day asked a good question concerning the war in Iraq: why should we wait until September to make a decision about it (whether to pull out, or at least begin to draw down American troops, etc)? How long do we have to wait? Haven't we waited long enough?
I guess I would answer that question this way: why NOT wait?
Look: I think we're fighting terrorists in Iraq, to a great degree; we're fighting those who have at least some kind of sympathy with Al Qaeda, with those who would like to defeat the United States, who wish harm to the ideas and principles we believe in (and there are members of Al Qaeda in Iraq). That's how this battle is connected to the overall war on terror.
And I believe the war on terror is the most important, twilight struggle of this generation, the most important conflict since the Cold War. And that battle was the most important since World War II. We cannot lose.
I believe that there is evidence that the "surge" is having a positive effect. I've linked to items explaining such at various times over the past couple of weeks. Given all that, of course we should wait until September, at least. Wars cannot be won on timetables. They won't operate according to timetables. In World War II, we didn't say, well, if the war's not over by 1944, then it's just too costly and we'd better think about getting out. Conflicts don't work that way. For one thing, if your enemy perceives you as operating according to a timetable, he'll simply wait you out. Wait long enough, and you'll leave. It's a sure way to lose.
I think one of the biggest problems with this war is the question of information. Americans on both sides of this question simply don't agree with each other concerning exactly what is happening both in Iraq and with the war on terror in general. And further, I don't think we any longer agree on just how important the war on terror is (you recall, John Edwards for example now says it was all just a political slogan to gain votes).
Even some of those who doubt the utility of the war in Iraq, though, agree that if the U.S. leaves, it could trigger an Iraqi plunge into a bloodbath, into civil war at best, into allowing that country to become a full-fledged Al Qaeda beachhead at worst. And I think a withdrawal would embolden every terrorist enemy of the United States, everywhere. America can be beaten, they'll say. Americans don't have the will for the struggle. Keep up terrorist attacks against them and against the West in general; nay, step them up.
How can we risk this? It's very dangerous to risk encouraging the enemy in that way (9/11 taught us that). Thus, I believe it's merely the responsible thing to do to at least wait until September, to give this surge every chance. At least. Putting it bluntly, terrorism is yet another example--we've seen it throughout history--of barbarians at the gates, enemies of civilization...I'd even go so far as to call it a manifestation of evil (and evil isn't some antiquarian notion--wasn't Hitler evil? weren't the mass murderers in Rwanda evil?. It's a very principled, yes, fundamental struggle. It has little to do with merely engaging in a partisan defense of a political party or presidential administration.
