When the United States made the decision to go into Iraq, there were a few purposes of that expedition: remove Saddam Hussein from power, attempt to rid the country of weapons of mass destruction and terrorist action and help set up a democratic system of government for Iraqi citizens. More than two years later, Saddam has been removed from his hole; as for the other U.S. goals … well, let’s just say Saddam’s not the only one with his head in the ground when it comes to dealing with the nation of Iraq.
It was reported today that terrorist acts worldwide rose sharply in 2004, and most of the additions occurred because of insurgents in Iraq who were angry because of heavy U.S. presence. Earlier this month, tens of thousands of Iraqis gathered to protest the ongoing presence of U.S. troops. Although it is impossible to determine whether terrorist acts would have risen or decreased had the United States never invaded Iraq, the fact remains that as long as our country stays at the helm of Iraq, terrorist acts are not likely to recede.
There is no timetable for a reduction of troops, and U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has said that “we don’t have an exit strategy; we have a victory strategy.”
Rumsfeld fails to mention that achieving this so-called “victory” will take a lot more than strategy: Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush administration are advocating a
victory built on the backs of U.S. soldiers and taxpayers.
Although soldiers sign a contract upon entering the military that determines the amount of time they will spend working for the armed forces, the United States has prevented about 14,000 soldiers with expired contracts from leaving the military. Under the U.S. “stop-loss” program, soldiers who signed a contract and failed to read the small print are basically required to continue military duty as long as the army deems necessary.
If you thought that the draft was a thing of the past, the stop-loss program will surely make you think again. Many military families, upset over the forcible extension of loved ones’ armed service, continually use the term “backdoor draft.”
Furthermore, the United States has already spent more than $300 billion to occupy Iraq. According to the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, unless U.S. troops are drastically reduced, a total of $646 billion will have been spent by 2015. It’s no secret that our country is currently experiencing a severe deficit. Rumsfeld’s hotheaded ideal of victory is funding itself straight from the pocketbooks of current and future U.S. taxpayers.
There is no way to erase the past: The United States has invaded Iraq, and that is that. However, the time has come for our country to develop a new strategy, or at least form some sort of exit plan that will be beneficial to the Iraqi people, the U.S. military and the taxpayers of our nation. If we stick around Iraq long enough to glimpse Rumsfeld’s “victory strategy,” the end result will likely be anything but victorious, for both nations involved.

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]