Bipartisan Victory in Iraq
Today’s capture of Saddam Hussein is a bipartisan day of joy for America. The powerful images of the Iraqi dictator should make every single American relieved if not happy. The reign of terror is officially over in Iraq and despite any differing opinions on the war this was a necessary step to accomplishing the common goals that all Americans should share at this point in the operation in Iraq, which is to finish building the country and get our troops home.
Today’s capture will undoubtedly ensure that Saddam Hussein will never again return to power in Iraq. He will never be allowed to run a cruel, terror-driven regime that relies on murder and intimidation to control a group of people. He will never be able to “cleanse” certain groups out of the population. He won’t be able to run torture chambers to keep intelligent Iraqis from challenging him.
This also increases the likelihood that an Iraqi government can be established sooner rather than later. Without having Saddam in custody, there was always going to be a tacit threat in the minds of some Iraqis that the previous practices could occur again in the future. Today, that is basically gone.
While these things are undoubtedly good for the Iraqi people, many selfish American goals are one step closer given today’s developments. Everyone in this country supports the troops on both sides of the partisan line. While it is possible and maybe even likely that violence will escalate in the coming months and weeks, an Iraq without Saddam strikes a blow in the hearts of many Saddam supporters. It may strengthen his supporters’ resolve in the short-term, but the overwhelming boost to all Iraqis who feared Saddam should be able to overcome that temporary lift.
What this should mean to our troops in Iraq is more willing sources of intelligence. Those who didn’t want to put themselves in harm’s way given the possibility for an eventual return to power should feel more freedom to give information. Hopefully this will further close the divide between American troops and Iraqi citizens. Iraqis who have been skeptical of American motives can feel strongly that the United States has done something to help a country that has been brutalized for far too long.
This, combined with a serious concentration on quick and successful rebuilding in Iraq will potentially create a country that is self-governing, self-sufficient and capable of being a great place to live. This is the goal of every American because I feel confident in saying that we all want troops to come home out of harm’s way. The best way to do that is to finish the job of establishing Iraq as a viable country. I know that there will still be a lot more time and commitment involved in the campaign in Iraq, but today is a clear step in the right direction to doing the job properly.
The United States has been divided since the war was announced. There is a clear anger and mistrust amongst groups of our citizens and the leadership of this country. These are some of the things that make our country great, but regardless of the different stances on whether the war in Iraq was moral and/or justifiable, it was a path chosen by the leadership. Given the fact that this decision was made, I am confident in saying that the events of today are a step toward accomplishing the goals that bind us all; a safe and quick return home for the United States military.
Comments
Sideblog 
- Top Gun 2???!?!?!??!?!? Wednesday, 23 July 2008, 5:50 am
According to reports, the plot outline is, (wait for it) “The idea is Maverick is at the Top Gun school as an instructor — and this time it is he who has to deal with a cocky new female pilot.” - Be Afraid Utah Tuesday, 22 July 2008, 7:26 am
Carlos Boozer is a snake and one of the most dishonorable people in professional sports history. I guess I am not over this just yet. - How much you wanna bet… Thursday, 3 July 2008, 9:18 pm
That this 4-day work week will actually increase the amount of gasoline that these employees will be using? Instead of commuting to work, they will now be going to the grocery store, going to do som. […] - In-Car DVD Players are Stupid Thursday, 26 June 2008, 10:15 am
At least they will be when we get a load of in-car wifi!!!!! (I am such a geek.) - George Carlin is Gone Monday, 23 June 2008, 4:34 am
I once bet a guy in college that I could watch a George Carlin special on HBO without laughing. I did it, but it wasn’t at all easy. There is going to be a void left by Carlin dying. - Accepted Behaviors Tend to Increase Thursday, 19 June 2008, 12:15 pm
If you become too accepting of a condition that you really don’t want to encourage, you might just end up with unintended consequences. - Note to Potential Buyers… Thursday, 19 June 2008, 9:59 am
Our house is on the market and we keep getting feedback from people who look at our house. I have some notes for anyone looking at my house. This is one of them. I don’t know what you were expec. […] - Seattle Sonics Trial About to Begin Monday, 16 June 2008, 5:43 am
I have pledged my support for the city of Seattle to keep their basketball team. Now, as the trial date looms, I read that Seattle plans to use many of the same arguments that were used in Cleveland t. […] - Metallica Hates Bloggers Wednesday, 11 June 2008, 5:12 am
Metallica was against Napster back in the 90’s and today, they appear to be against bloggers. After inviting music bloggers to listen to six tracks of their upcoming album, the band has now gone aro. […] - Pat Forde is a Hack Volume II Tuesday, 10 June 2008, 5:29 am
I don’t know how many volumes we will have to run out here before someone gets their head out of their turd-cutter and cuts this turd from the roster of writers at ESPN. Forde lambasted Ohio State a. […]
A Bipartisan Victory in Iraq
Today’s capture of Saddam Hussein is a bipartisan day of joy for America. The powerful images of the Iraqi dictator…
Craig’s knows how I feel about this “action,” but I just want to throw my two cents into the ring anyway. I’m not going to go back to the root of the problem, which was Bush’s decision in the beginning, because I’ve sung that song one too many times already.
All I have to say is: if you’re bleeding out of your eyes and ears, it’s not really a major victory when your headache finally goes away. In the grand scheme of things, Saddam was just a headache that’s finally gone away.
Craig, I think you are running for office. Certianly you could, with a speech like that.
I agree with Justin, this is minor.
You know it is possible to separate your hatred for the president with the ongoing military action in Iraq. You don’t see how this could be a domino effect type of event? You don’t think the fear of this man in the Iraqi people (which not incidentally caused one persecuted Iraqi journalist to weep at the news of his capture) being lifted can have a positive effect of eventually getting our troops out of Iraq? This is good for the United States including the next president even if it happens to be a Democrat who is going to be working toward “finishing” the job in Iraq and extracting our forces. Again, how is this not a good thing?
Not saying it’s not a good thing. It’s just a very, very small good thing. The headache analogy is fitting, I think.
I don’t make any bones about the fact that the president sucks. I don’t *hate* him. I don’t wish ill upon him and his family, or anything. Probably a really good guy. He just sucks at his job. I made pains to point out that I’m not going back to the “What the hell are we doing there in the first place?” debate. It’s not about that.
It’s about not falling all over ourselves congratulating Bush and the military, because we haven’t won anything. We haven’t finished. And, in the end, I think you’re vastly overstating how much Saddam’s capture aids whatever real goals we may have that aren’t about getting the president reelected.
The only person in the world safer today than he was two days ago is Saddam.
Again, I gotta agree with Justin here. He has articulated my thoughts exactly.
I suppose that it MIGHT help us get out of Iraq a LITTLE bit earlier. But really, we were talking about getting out whether or not we found Saddam. The real work here is helping build a nation… not that we are in the nation building business. Bush: “America is not in the nation-building business”.
Ok, well then refute some of the points I made. I pointed out a few ways that I think this event can help the situation. Where did I go wrong? How will it go differently? I don’t have a problem with differing opinions on this one, but I need something more than the 10,000 foot view.
I am not sure that there is an refuting to be done. I don’t think we are disagreeing with you. We are arguing that the media is making too big a deal out of it. Let’s look at it this way: By how much - how many days, weeks, months, years - will this speed up the US’s involvement in Iraq? I am saying 16.7 days.
This is assuming that there is not a power struggle to fill the vaccuum that his ousting has left… or worse, someone eviler and more organized moving in quickly. Yes, if that deos not happen, I am looking @ 16.7 fewer days that my cousins can be shot at or blown up in Iraq.
I’m not a fan of Bush and I’m ambivalent at best about this war, but I’m hard pressed to see Saddam’s capture as anything but good. I think it weakens the resolve of Baathists, strengthens the resolve of pro-democracy Iraqis, and gives the U.S. a chance to show that even the worst criminal can receive due process. Saddam might even give up some good intelligence. I don’t know that it will have a profound effect, but any effect it has will be toward a shorter, less violent conflict and a more successful outcome. To me, those things are more important than whatever temporary boost the news might give Bush in the approval ratings.
Declaring a “bipartisan day of joy for America” might be a little overstated, but I find some satisfaction in knowing that this mass-murdering peckerhead is going to be tried for his crimes.
Why is everyone so mad at Jerry Garcia? I thought everyone would be happy to know he is alive!!!!
I’ll reiterate if I haven’t been clear: of course it’s a good thing. There is no bad from it. I can only say it so many times. But this doesn’t make me want to hold hands with my Republican friends and sing “America the Beautiful.” It doesn’t make Bush any less of a shitty president. It means there’s one fewer bad person out there. I’m no more pleased than I would be if OJ were put in prison. And I don’t get any special joy out of the possibility of the Saddam Trial of the Century. Whatever. Milosovic is on trial right now. Does anyone give a shit? Nevermind that there are hundreds of people in the world at the moment who can and will do a lot more damage than Saddam could.
First of all, disagreeing with what Craig’s written isn’t exactly like trying to disprove that the sky is blue. It’s speculation on his part, and what I have to say is speculation on my part, of course. But I don’t feel like the onus is on me here, Craig. Why don’t you explain your thinking? How is it that you figure our lives are so much easier, now?
I disagree with most of Craig’s speculations, and not just the ones about the campfire songs I should be signing with Trent Lott right now.
I don’t think this arrest makes any substantive contribution to ending our long, national nightmare even 16.7 days sooner. If you think the Anti-Americans in Iraq are going to shrug and go take a nap now that Saddam’s out of the picture, you’re naive.
The attacks aren’t going to stop. The transfer of leadership isn’t going to be any easier. And both of those things are true because there are a lot of people in this part of the world simply don’t like us. Saddam’s been out of the picture for months now, and one or two kids a day die in Iraq.
How long ago did we set up Afghanistan? There was no Saddam to capture there, and look how well that’s working out. We might be out of there by 2010 if we’re lucky.
And how long are Iraqis going to have to look before someone else steps up for Saddam as official Biggest Pain in Our Ass?
I’m just saying don’t start writing the epic poetry until the job’s done, and I think this is akin to thinking you can stop the LA riots by re-arresting Rodney King.
I think our lives are easier because I think intelligence sources will be more willing. (as I said in my post) I know the attacks aren’t going to stop. They could very well increase over the next couple of weeks. (as I said in my post) This doesn’t make Bush any less “shitty” a president. (as I said in my post) What are we arguing about again?
You could use a campfire session with Trent Lott because you need to lighten up.
I don’t know if the following will make sense, but I’ll fly it up the flagpole and see if anyone shoots at it. Not everyone in Iraq is either a Baathist insurgent or a pro-democracy demonstrator. Most of them are just folks, who would really appreciate it if they could get back to the business of living. But there are also some people on the bubble. People who could become active in support of the U.S.-led transformation, and other people who could become active against it. To these bubble people, I think the disposition of Saddam’s fate might be a big deal. It will be harder to recruit bubble people to fight the U.S. when the old regime seems less likely to reanimate. It will be more likely that bubble people will contribute to the U.S. initiative. I mean “contribute” in the broadest sense: take and stay at local government jobs, go back to work, go back to school, volunteer at rebuilding activities. I don’t even know what else. Maybe I’m naive, but I think that given incontrovertible evidence that Saddam is done (as opposed to rumours that he was blown up, or regrouping in Syria, or whatever), bubble people will tend to either act in the interest of the U.S., or not act against it. I’m with you that Saddam’s capture is not cause to be out holding candles around the green and restyling our cars with red, white, and blue house paint, but it’s a lot better than some previously likely alternatives.
First of all, let me just say that I’m not getting worked into a frenzy over here, so don’t worry that I’m flying off the handle and abusing neighborhood children because of this topic of discussion. I strongly, strongly disagree. But I’m not throwing things around the house. So don’t fret that I need to lighten up to keep my blood pressure down or anything)
Call me crazy (and I really mean it, maybe I’m the only one who thinks this way), but it seems like Saddam’s been a non-factor since this whole thing started. I, of course, don’t know what he’s been doing since we started trying to blow him up, but I’ve never interpreted the attacks on our troops since we took Baghdad as being coordinated at all, nevermind by Saddam or his people. They seem random and widespread, a lot more widespread than whatever was left of Saddam’s sphere of influence. I don’t think these people are or were “on the bubble.” These people probably aren’t Baath party; they just hate America. I don’t think they can be convinced.
Basically what I’m saying is - and I have no proof of this at all, of course. I’m just speculating - I don’t think our problem is the Baathists or Saddam’s supporters anymore. It’s the men and boys in every town across Iraq who happen to have guns sitting around and who’ve known nothing for most of their lives but hating America. Saddam’s capture doesn’t solve that problem, in the short or the long term, even a little bit.
Chris is probably right in that there are plenty of people who are on that bubble and can and will be swayed by this. But part of the problem we always have in this part of the world is that they just don’t like Americans. Even in the best-case scenario, we’re going to be there an awfully long time. That’s going to piss off some of these “bubble” people. (See: Saudi Arabia. They asked us to set up a base, and we did, and there were weekly riots about it for two years) And I honestly believe that every day we spend there probably does more bad than good in terms of the attitude of these “bubble” people. Eventually they’re going to get tired of seeing white folks pointing high-powered rifles at them.
Saddam’s capture is good. If it does help us get the hell out of Iraq faster, somehow, then it’s magnificent. Even after reading what Craig said (in his post) and what Chris has since written, I still can’t imagine any circumstances under which that would be true. The two things are completely independent in my mind. Maybe I’m missing a stanza somewhere.
Craig, of course, nothing personal, as always. Just disagreeing. And when I’m using colorful language in my rebuttal, it’s certainly not meant as an attack. Just trying to flower my point with a little imagery.
I have to go sit down with Orrin Hatch and write a folk song about this now.
Once again… why do I bother to post when the voice of reason is perfectly embodied in Justin.
And speaking of voice, PLEASE write a folk song about this. Not these posts, but about Saddam’s capture. Talk about hiding in a little hole and the reaction of the first troop upon learning it was Saddam. That’d rock.
We will get out of Iraq when Cheny’s company’s pockets are lined with all that money we are “giving” to Iraq. I think they call it laundering back in Boston. This may not have been the original reason for starting the war (engaging (unprovokedly!) in the police action) but it sure has worked out for a few choice companies.
Capturing Saddam was important not because he was coordinating attacks, but because most of the Iraqi population was terrified of what he would do to them if he somehow came back to power. In 1991, some Iraqis tried to overthrow him, thinking that they would receive our support. We did not support them. Saddam took names and eliminated them.
My guess is that a large chunk of the population remained “on the bubble” for fear of future repurcussions if the US pulled back and Saddam came back to power.
Now we will just have to fear all those people who Bush Sr. promised to help. Well, since most of them are dead, we will have to fear their few remaining children in about 15 years. How do we get into these messes again?