David Ignatias Writes On Iraq

I don’t often agree with David Ignatias, columnist for the Washington Post. Today is an exception. He writes:

Try to imagine what was running through the mind of Hassan Kazemi Qomi, Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad, as he sat across the negotiating table from his American counterpart, Ryan Crocker, last week.While the U.S. diplomat delivered his stern warning against Iranian meddling in Iraq, Qomi must have wondered: Why should I listen to this guy? Congress is going to start pulling U.S. troops out soon, no matter what he says. (My emphsis)

That’s the heart of the problem, as I see the anti-war movement in this country. Both sides voted approval to back up the UN Iraq Resolutions with force. I won’t argue with the characterization that the war was mishandled. Bush tried to fight the war on the cheap. However, once committed, once our military starts dying, we owe it to them and our future credibility to fight to win, otherwise any enemy will say, “If we just hold on long enough, America will get tired and leave and we can have our way. If they bleed, they will leave.”

The anti-war movement should make the distinction between fighting to keep us out of war and providing “aid and comfort” to the enemy once in. I think it’s disgraceful to use our young and then cut and run with nothing to show for it except crosses.

One could argue that we should never go to war, never send troops anywhere in the world…unless we ruthlessly, overwhelmingly enforce our will.

David Ignatias

Update:


Discussion Area - Leave a Comment




Copyright © 2007 Mover Mike. Design by Anthony Baggett.