WhiteAfricanAmerican
10-29-2005, 09:08 AM
I just got reading Ed-Koch's piece regarding Cindy Sheehan, that IHL posted earlier this month.
A great piece, no doubt. I do however disagree with Koch on one aspect;
"...we have accomplished our original goal to prevent Iraq from threatening us or its regional neighbors. We should declare victory and get out. Yes, there probably will be a civil war among the Kurds, Sunni and Shia. If the UN — which is still under a cloud because of the "Oil for Food" scandal — decides to take a military role in Iraq to stop the civil war, we can join them at that time. Having accomplished our original mission, we should no longer be fulfilling the obligations of other countries, such as Germany and France which have had a free ride to date. Even in Afghanistan, the latter NATO allies, do not participate in combat duty, leaving that and the ensuing casualties for the U.S. to bear. "
That is a logical assesment, no arguement there. But then I tend to look at things a little differently than a lot of people.
Consider, for a moment, the HBO movie "Band of Brothers"
In the beginning of the movie we're introduced to two characers; 1st Lt Sobel and 2nd Lt Winters.
Sobel the Company Commander, is a by the book tough instructor who, before deplyment is promoted to Captain, and Winters along with him make 1st Lt.
During training in England before deployment into Germany, Sobel demonstrates his inability to lead men, and the fact that his men do not trust him and as a result he is removed as Comapny CO, and sent back to England as a jump instructor. Now remember, Sobell is a Capt. Winters is a 1st Lt.
After the jump on D-Day into Germany, and leading up to the surrender of Germany, Winters demonstrates a brilliant mind and ability to lead men, PARTICULARLY under fire. As a result he advances to Capt and then to Major in 5 years (which is a really short time to advance through 2 ranks) by virtue of Battle field promotions.
After the German Surrender, Sobell and Winters run into each other. Sobell is still a Captain, whereas Winters who was Sobells junior, is now a Major.
Winters, through a trial by fire, became a more efficient, respected, admired and celebrated leader than Sobell.
How does this tie into the war in Iraq and Ed Koch's suggestion.
One of the reasons the US is as powerful and admired (whether people will admit it or not is immaterial) is by virtue of the trial by fire.
The entire history of this nation has been tempered by the fires of conflict. The US has way more often than not, not backed down from a conflict, stepping out of it's comfort zone, to ensure that the world is at peace with itself.
The war in Iraq is no different. By staying the course in Iraq, the US becomes tougher, more tenacious, and more respected. The population of this world, particularly those under oppression recognise and are acutely aware of what the US has achieved in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is those people's opinion that we ought to be concerned about.
The leaders of the various countries, despite their facades do not necessarily represent the voice of their people. Governments in 2nd and 3rd world countries, more often are the oppressors, and have very little experience with what it is like to be oppressed. People in these countries do not have the ability we do, to regularly elect their officials.
So when France, Germany, or Zimbabwe attempt to chastise the US, it's nothing more than a little yapping dog that is trying to bite our ankles, because we are exposing them for what they are, namely hypocritcal scum who are more concerned with their position as a leader of a country than the welfare of the people they purport to govern.
Instead, when activities like elections in Iraq achieve 80% voter turn out DESPITE threats of intense violence, it is blazingly obvious that there are people who are directly impacted by this war, who are happy that we are there fighting this war.
As a child in Zimbabwe, living under Robert Mugabe; another Saddam Hussein, just without the WMD's, I remember praying, wishing, hoping that the US or Uk would invade us and remove Mugabe. That was about the only option we would have had to be rid of him. As we can see, there has been no invasion into Zimbabwe (why would there be, Mugabe is no threat to the world) and Mugabe is still there TWENTY FIVE YEARS LATER.
The Iraqi, Afghans, Chinese, Sudanese, Iranians, etc are watching our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, they see that people that once had no hope of stepping out from under the boot of the tyrant are now voting in a coherant manner, they are excited within themselves because now they have hope of stepping out from under the regimes that are brutalising them. They will not speakout, not yet. Once they realise it is safe, that the Saddam's of the world will not return, there will be an out pouring of gratitude that no one will be able to comprehend.
How do I know this?
Simple, I've lived that life. I know how I felt toward my Father for getting us the hell out of Zimbabwe, albeit with only the clothes on our backs and what ever we could get in a station wagon.
So, to those who support that war and the troops, Courage!
To those who are not sure of where they stand, think for a second what it would be like to be living the life of a Iraqi, and how you'd feel now that the oppressor is gone.
To those who are reasonably opposed to the war, that is your prerogative. However, a wiseman once said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". God forbid you are ever in a position such as the Iraqi, and that the powers of the world refuse to come to your aid based on your logic and positions.
To those who are vehemently and illogically opposed to the war, ==== YOU!
A great piece, no doubt. I do however disagree with Koch on one aspect;
"...we have accomplished our original goal to prevent Iraq from threatening us or its regional neighbors. We should declare victory and get out. Yes, there probably will be a civil war among the Kurds, Sunni and Shia. If the UN — which is still under a cloud because of the "Oil for Food" scandal — decides to take a military role in Iraq to stop the civil war, we can join them at that time. Having accomplished our original mission, we should no longer be fulfilling the obligations of other countries, such as Germany and France which have had a free ride to date. Even in Afghanistan, the latter NATO allies, do not participate in combat duty, leaving that and the ensuing casualties for the U.S. to bear. "
That is a logical assesment, no arguement there. But then I tend to look at things a little differently than a lot of people.
Consider, for a moment, the HBO movie "Band of Brothers"
In the beginning of the movie we're introduced to two characers; 1st Lt Sobel and 2nd Lt Winters.
Sobel the Company Commander, is a by the book tough instructor who, before deplyment is promoted to Captain, and Winters along with him make 1st Lt.
During training in England before deployment into Germany, Sobel demonstrates his inability to lead men, and the fact that his men do not trust him and as a result he is removed as Comapny CO, and sent back to England as a jump instructor. Now remember, Sobell is a Capt. Winters is a 1st Lt.
After the jump on D-Day into Germany, and leading up to the surrender of Germany, Winters demonstrates a brilliant mind and ability to lead men, PARTICULARLY under fire. As a result he advances to Capt and then to Major in 5 years (which is a really short time to advance through 2 ranks) by virtue of Battle field promotions.
After the German Surrender, Sobell and Winters run into each other. Sobell is still a Captain, whereas Winters who was Sobells junior, is now a Major.
Winters, through a trial by fire, became a more efficient, respected, admired and celebrated leader than Sobell.
How does this tie into the war in Iraq and Ed Koch's suggestion.
One of the reasons the US is as powerful and admired (whether people will admit it or not is immaterial) is by virtue of the trial by fire.
The entire history of this nation has been tempered by the fires of conflict. The US has way more often than not, not backed down from a conflict, stepping out of it's comfort zone, to ensure that the world is at peace with itself.
The war in Iraq is no different. By staying the course in Iraq, the US becomes tougher, more tenacious, and more respected. The population of this world, particularly those under oppression recognise and are acutely aware of what the US has achieved in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is those people's opinion that we ought to be concerned about.
The leaders of the various countries, despite their facades do not necessarily represent the voice of their people. Governments in 2nd and 3rd world countries, more often are the oppressors, and have very little experience with what it is like to be oppressed. People in these countries do not have the ability we do, to regularly elect their officials.
So when France, Germany, or Zimbabwe attempt to chastise the US, it's nothing more than a little yapping dog that is trying to bite our ankles, because we are exposing them for what they are, namely hypocritcal scum who are more concerned with their position as a leader of a country than the welfare of the people they purport to govern.
Instead, when activities like elections in Iraq achieve 80% voter turn out DESPITE threats of intense violence, it is blazingly obvious that there are people who are directly impacted by this war, who are happy that we are there fighting this war.
As a child in Zimbabwe, living under Robert Mugabe; another Saddam Hussein, just without the WMD's, I remember praying, wishing, hoping that the US or Uk would invade us and remove Mugabe. That was about the only option we would have had to be rid of him. As we can see, there has been no invasion into Zimbabwe (why would there be, Mugabe is no threat to the world) and Mugabe is still there TWENTY FIVE YEARS LATER.
The Iraqi, Afghans, Chinese, Sudanese, Iranians, etc are watching our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, they see that people that once had no hope of stepping out from under the boot of the tyrant are now voting in a coherant manner, they are excited within themselves because now they have hope of stepping out from under the regimes that are brutalising them. They will not speakout, not yet. Once they realise it is safe, that the Saddam's of the world will not return, there will be an out pouring of gratitude that no one will be able to comprehend.
How do I know this?
Simple, I've lived that life. I know how I felt toward my Father for getting us the hell out of Zimbabwe, albeit with only the clothes on our backs and what ever we could get in a station wagon.
So, to those who support that war and the troops, Courage!
To those who are not sure of where they stand, think for a second what it would be like to be living the life of a Iraqi, and how you'd feel now that the oppressor is gone.
To those who are reasonably opposed to the war, that is your prerogative. However, a wiseman once said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". God forbid you are ever in a position such as the Iraqi, and that the powers of the world refuse to come to your aid based on your logic and positions.
To those who are vehemently and illogically opposed to the war, ==== YOU!