Selfish Choices: Democrats Ignore the Human Costs

Selfish Choices: Democrats Ignore the Human Costs

by John Little on 17/04/2007

Rocco DiPippo has onserved the effect of the surge firsthand:

It has been more than three months since that tense trip. Two weeks ago, I took another trip through Baghdad. I then headed south and eventually north to a small town close to Iran’s border. In all, I traveled approximately 400 miles. At no time did I feel threatened, either when approaching checkpoints, (all of which were legitimate and well-manned), or upon exiting my car to visit a few reconstruction projects, each in separate towns miles apart.

There were other stunning differences between that trip, and the one I’d taken in December.

On the December trip I had seen abandoned shops and frightened people. On the latest one I saw many shops opened and people going about their business in what appeared to be a relaxed manner. On the first trip I saw cars and trucks in gas lines that stretched for miles. On the latest trip, though gas lines existed, they were far shorter, and looked about as long as those experienced by Americans at the height of the 1970s oil crisis. On the first trip I saw nothing but ruin: houses and other buildings in derelict condition, most appearing unfit for human habitation. On the latest trip I still saw many houses in poor condition, but I also saw homes being built, and a good number of existing houses and storefronts being repaired

As the miles clicked by and I viewed the passing scenes and the people in them, I realized I was seeing widespread signs of something I hadn’t seen much of four months ago: I was seeing Hope. I saw that Iraqis had not yet given up on their lives or their country. I saw widespread evidence they are rebuilding both.

A simple thing is kindling that hope, and it is a thing being affected by the new security plan: the just imposition of basic law and order.

That hope would evaporate in the explosion of violence, dwarfing anything we’ve seen yet, that would follow an American withdrawal. Rocco goes on in an attempt to talk some sense into the Democrats but it doesn’t matter. The problem isn’t a lack of understanding. They know that an early withdrawal will result in chaos and murder on a scale that eclipses anything yet seen. The problem is that there are elections to win and they just don’t care what happens to American national security or innocent Iraqi lives in the process.

Related posts:
Al Gore Freaks Out Again: Energy Crisis Threatens Human Civilization
He wants to eliminate carbon-based fuels within a decade: “The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk,” Gore said. In a speech at...

Reverse: The Democrats New Direction
I don’t think this will turn truly ugly for a couple of months but 2007 is shaping up to be a nightmare: Democratic Senator Carl Levin said American voters had...

Democrats Take the Senate
From bad to worse: Democrat Jim Webb won Virginia’s pivotal Senate race Wednesday, unseating Republican George Allen and giving the Democrats total control of Congress for the first time in...

Cindy Sheehan Gives Up on the Democrats
Apparently the two of us get hate mail from the same group of “peace-loving” lefties: I have endured a lot of smear and hatred since Casey was killed and especially...

Breaking News: The Democrats Have Chosen
Late last night I wrote that the next two years would be critical for the Democrats. Would they shift to the center and reclaim their party from the soy milk...

Support

Please show your support for the work done here, and on Twitter, with a PayPal contribution.

There are 16 comments in this article:

17/04/2007ME says:

“That hope would evaporate in the explosion of violence, dwarfing anything we’ve seen yet, that would follow an American withdrawal.”

except you don’t know that, and you don’t back it up with anything.

Considering that this argument comes from the same people who used the words “cakewalk” and “mission accomplished”, I don’t consider the analysis credible.

You can’t be wrong about how certain people in a certain country are going to react to certain events over and over again, and then just expect us to take it on faith that “this time” you’re right, and things will get that much worse when we leave.

I would actually posit the opposite… that our position in Iraq as occupiers is what is driving the current violence. That when we leave, we will have pulled the rug out from under the insurgency…they will have no foriegn enemy to rally their cause around. People are less likely to join a militia if they know they’ll be killing fellow Iraqis, instead of “foreign occupier infidels”.
17/04/2007jvf says:

You should have thought of this before supporting this ill concieved war in the first place. What the hell did you Cons think would happen?
17/04/2007MattM says:

“The problem is that there are elections to win and they just don’t care what happens to American national security or innocent Iraqi lives in the process.”

That’s a funny one. If you cared about national security or innocent Iraqi lives at all, you wouldn’t have gone to war in the first place.
17/04/2007Debra P. says:

Whatever improvements are taking place in specific areas because of the surge are not likely to last after it ends. And meanwhile the violence in other areas is continuing unabated. Here in the U. S. we have just experienced a horrific event in which over 30 people were killed. Well, that level of violence is an everyday occurrence in Iraq. We keep hearing how terrible it would be if we withdrew our forces. But if we stay for another five years, or ten, or ad infinitum, will it be any different? Because of the gross incompetence of the Bush administration we find ourselves in a position where NO MATTER WHAT WE DO IN IRAQ NOW we are not going to leave behind a pretty situation. This simply cannot go on indefinitely. Our presence there is actually inflaming the situation. And maintaining it is draining the economic resources that we ought to be putting toward critical needs here at home. Even more importantly, precious lives, both American and Iraqi. are being squandered in the effort to save face for the administration.

To imply that caring about the human costs of the war means continuing it indefinitely is nothing less than ludicrous.
17/04/2007Brett says:

Are we sure that leaving will cause more violence? I suspect that violence typically is caused by instability, which we are perpetuating. Is it possible that if we left, that some sort of stability would fall into place rather quickly? …Whereas if we stay, we’ll get more of the medium-level violence that we have now, and only prolong that stability?

I’m really just asking what people think.

One point worth noting: We certainly can’t just take the Bush administration’s word for it. He might be right. Perhaps it will be bad. But I mean, come on, even die-hard conservatives have got to admit that Bush’s predictions are wrong more than they are right.
17/04/2007Colin says:

From the article:
“Rocco DiPippo is an American Thinker contributor and blogger at The Autonomist, who works for a civilian contractor in Baghdad.”

Read: has a job because of the Iraq War.

I can’t imagine why this guy would want our occupation to continue.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
17/04/2007Jim Harrison says:

Whether they are right or wrong, the majority of Americans who want us out of Iraq are not looking to win any elections. Meanwhile, many critics of Bush’s policies are keenly aware of our respoonsibilities to a country we have so thoroughly trashed. Juan Cole, for example, whose web site Informed Comment is a handy clearing house for news on Iraq, has consistently resisted the notion of simply leaving the country. In the absence of genuine give and take between the administration and the repreentatives of the majority , our exit from Iraq will probably indeed be as ragged as our exit from Vietnam. It doen’t have to be, however.

I keep floating a modest proposal: granted the horrible mess we’re in, how about beginning with some modest but meaningful steps instead of pretending that some grand plan can be defined in advance? For example, If the United States made a binding committment to leave Iraq completely once certain benchmarks were attained, the insurgents would lose one of their best arguments. As it is, Iraqis of all stripes have every reason to believe that Bush and Co. plan on a permanent occupation since we’ve build enormous bases and the largest embassy on the planet. Granted that a continuing American military presence would be desirable in some respects, nations have to make compromises to achieve larger goals. We made a mistake; we’ve got to expect to pay some price for it.
17/04/2007madmatt says:

The rethugs have had 4 years to define and accomplish victory…they can do neither. Until you can why don’t we bring our boys and girls home so that they don’t have to be in the midst of a civil war that Bush’s actions started.

How many soldiers died this month so that he could go thru roadblocks and slightly less barren hinterlands of Iraq?

And let us not forget, you and your ilk have BEEN WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING so far, why should we trust your opinion? Maybe leaving will spark the desire that occupation has drowned.
17/04/2007Doug says:

“[Democrats] know that an early withdrawal will result in chaos and murder on a scale that eclipses anything yet seen. The problem is that there are elections to win and they just don’t care what happens to American national security or innocent Iraqi lives in the process. ”

Are you really so simple-minded as to believe this? Is it this “black or white” adolescent morality what makes you so gullible?

No. People care. They happen to have a different take on the situation than you. Perhaps you should attempt to convince people through *reasoned argument*.
17/04/2007Magnus says:

This has never been about the Iraqis. The right is merely making sure that *when* the Us has to retreat with their tail between their legs, that the democrats get the blame.

It’s really impressive.

-Magnus
17/04/2007Ted says:

“They know that an early withdrawal will result in chaos and murder on a scale that eclipses anything yet seen. The problem is that there are elections to win and they just don’t care what happens to American national security or innocent Iraqi lives in the process.”

If it’s a position that wins elections, it must be popular with the American people. So that would imply that most of the American people don’t care what happens to American national security or innocent Iraqi lives, or else they’re too stupid to understand what will happen. I would like to wholeheartedly encourage the Republicans to make either of their positions the theme of their 2008 campaigns.
18/04/2007Super90 says:

“innocent Iraqi lives”?! Anyone who supports Bush has automatically lost the right to say anything whatsoever about innocent Iraqi lives considering the (conservative estimate) 500,000 iraqis, the vast majority of whom were by any definition innocent, killed in this misguided, woebegotten war. No. Seriously. You lost your right. Shut up.
18/04/2007danjr0802 says:

Here’s the thing though. We can’t stay forever..we just can’t.

I was against removing troops until a couple of weeks ago. I am convinced though at this point that you’re right. It will be a disaster when we leave…whenever we leave, sooner or later.

At some point we pay for this, Iraq pays for this in blood the likes of which we cannot fathom. But pay we will.

The question is..do we let the President stall with hundreds of more dead Americans & billions of more dollars so he can pass teh buck onto the Dem who takes power in 2008?

Or do we do it now to save American lives. Either way it’s a bloodbath. The only question is how much more sacrifice we make while we stall the bloodbath.
18/04/2007gil says:

“Early withdrawal”

Dear home page… After four years and counting we will hardly have an “early withdrawal”.

Of course in the Republican world of make- pretend you guys believe you still have any credibility left after going into Iraq in the first place, and after making mistake after mistake with cero, zip, nada accountabilty EVER.

Your “game” is clear; stay in Iraq until some how some miracle will happen and you Republicans can save some face. Problem with this plan Republicans is that your “face” is long gone…. There is nothing to save any more.
18/04/2007michmod says:

The dems ignore the human costs. The irony of that statement…wow. WOW. What of the 127 Iraqis blown to bits today? How many dozens the day before that? And the day before that? The tragedy is the human costs were not weighed before we started this misbegotten war. And the costs will be great regardless. Either way. The majority of Iraqis want us out. There is no progress. We owe the Iraqis some competence, at last. Sadly, no one applied for the job. We need a well planned pull out with safe havens for those innocents to wait out the storm.
19/04/2007John Ryan says:

Look yesterday 300 were killed in Iraq. Iraq is a mess and not getting any better. Even the overall US Commander is saying that the surge is the “last chance”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070418/pl_afp/usmilitaryafghanistaniranusiraqmilitary
And we have Rocco saying that things are going great there !!

Blogs of War