[Vision2020] A No-Win Situation

[Tom Hansen]

>From today's (January 7, 2007) Spokesman Review -

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Editorials

Our view: A no-win situation
Bush should begin to withdraw troops from Iraq

January 7, 2007

On March 21, 2003, Cpl. Brian Matthew Kennedy of Houston was among the first
U.S. soldiers to die in the Iraq war when the helicopter he was riding in
crashed in Kuwait, killing three other American Marines and eight British
Marines.

Three days before that, the gung-ho Kennedy, 25, called his mother to tell
her he was headed into action. After the crash Kennedy's father said, "He
gave his life in an effort to contribute to the freedom of the Iraqi
people."

Indeed, the invasion was called Operation Iraqi Freedom and a plausible
argument could be made at the time that war could be waged under that
banner. But since then, the original justifications - and enthusiasm - have
melted away like insurgents in the night.
 
Heading into this weekend, at least 3,004 U.S. troops have died in the Iraq
conflict. More than 25,000 have been wounded - many grievously. What can
political leaders tell the parents of the 3,004th casualty? How can they
justify expanding this aimless operation?

Sometime this week, President Bush will answer those questions, or at least
attempt to. Early indications are that the president will send a "surge" of
troops to help control the uncontrollable. Military leaders don't want them,
nor do they think an escalation will help.

On Nov. 15, Gen. John Abizaid told the Senate Armed Services Committee,
"I've met with every divisional commander. General (George) Casey, the corps
commander, ([Lt.) General (Martin) Dempsey - we all talked together. And I
said, 'In your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American
troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in
Iraq?' And they all said, 'No.' "

The generals believe that our very presence on Iraqi soil is part of the
problem and that expanding it will only exacerbate the chaotic violence.
Bush's mantra throughout the 2004 election was that he would give the
generals whatever they needed to succeed. Soon, he'll be sending them aas
many as 20,000 more troops over their objections. Then again, those generals
are being replaced with more compliant leaders.

But replacing the leadership won't change the outlook of those doing the
fighting. A recent Military Times poll found that active members of the
military, who were once strong supporters of the war, have grown
pessimistic.

Only 35 percent approve of the way the Bush administration has handled the
war. Two years ago, 83 percent believed the war would be successful. Now,
it's 50 percent, but even that group thinks it will take at least five
years. Only 41 percent said we should've invaded.

We could send 20,000 troops or 120,000, but it wouldn't matter. There is no
military solution to a country hopelessly infected with sectarian violence,
a ruthless insurgency and opportunistic terrorists. Iraq's leadership is not
enthusiastic about a U.S. escalation, either. In Iraq, there will be no
victory, certainly not as the president currently defines it. There will be
no graceful exit. Iraq will descend into all-out chaos. It's just a matter
of when. We can't even be sure that Iraq will end up being a Middle East
ally.

It's time to turn this over to the diplomats and cut our losses. For what do
we tell the next group of soldiers and their families when they ask: "What
are we fighting for?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

***************************************************

"Seldom, if ever, has a war ended leaving the victors with such a sense of
uncertainty and fear -- with such a realization that the future is obscure
and that survival is not assured."

- Edward R. Murrow

***************************************************