Iraq is a trending topic in the headlines once again, and as before, all the pundits are more than eager to say their piece, and then some.
Many of the voices are familiar ones – politicians like John McCain, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, and media contributors like Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. You know them as them as the people who advocated for and some even influenced the Bush Administration’s decision to invade and occupy Iraq back in 2003. It’s a decision that’s resulted in completely destabilizing the Iraqi region and cost thousands of American lives, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives. Instead of holding these neoconservative strategists and theorists accountable for their influential words and decisions, they’re given national press platforms to look like objective experts giving consultations.
The scene is beyond ironic, that the people who brought on about a war most Americans agree was a mistake in the first place, are looked up to for guidance on how to resolve the current situation in Iraq. Their voice matter of course, they have the beautiful 1st Amendment rights to free speech, but the facts have already discredited them long while ago. That must be made clear in whatever interviews they go on. Otherwise, the conservatives who pushed for war under the false pretense that Saddam Hussein was developing NCB (nuclear, chemical, biological) weapons to attack the United States will pretend that they claimed instead that the war was to liberate the Iraqis from oppression, as shown in this video.
This neoconservative/neoliberal lie was never true. The invasion and occupation of Iraq by United States and other partnered countries was never about providing freedom from tyranny to the Iraqi people. If that was the case, the war should have ended with Operation Iraqi Freedom, instead of morphing into Operation Enduring Freedom. This was a “democracy” enforced onto a nation via military occupation, enduring for over ten years.
John Cornyn III, a Republican senator of Texas recently retweeted: “It took nearly 4,500 American lives to win freedom for Iraq. It took one president to lose it.” The irony of course is that this is the same Texas senator who’s voted against benefits and assistance to Iraq war veterans time and time again.
The claim that United Stated entered Iraq to win freedom was never true, but what if we actually consider the claim at face value? How valid can the claim be? The safe answer is to say that it’s debatable. My answer is that it’s bogus, one that allows warmongerers to justify invasion. My answer is thus because what if we switch the subjects in question?
Imagine for example, if majority of the world believed that the United States of America was suffering under the tyranny of dictator Barack Obama. Thus, under the pretense that America must be freed from the tyrannical Obama, Iraqi government decides to send its warplanes and engages in a massive bombing campaign that devastates Washington D.C. Iraqi press calls this action “Operation United States Freedom.” Should Americans be glad of the supposed sacrifice of the Iraqi soldiers in this scenario? If the answer is no, then how can we answer yes when it’s simply the other way around? After all, weren’t the Iraqi soldiers sent to “liberate” America, just like how American soldiers were sent to “liberate” Iraq?