Withdraw From Iraq - But Not Now

As time goes on, the number of voices being heard urging President Bush to withdraw from Iraq appears to be growing. What is surprising to many is that some of those voices belong to conservatives. From pundits such as Armstrong Williams, and politicians like Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, the chorus has grown louder in recent days.

So, should we withdraw from Iraq? Certainly. Should we withdraw now? Absolutely not.

Let me state that I have always had some mixed thoughts about the initial decision to go into Iraq. For starters, there was no declaration of war, only a congressional “authorization” to use force – something that the founders of our nation would have found disingenuous at the very least. This congress, and this president however, are not the first to engage in warfare outside the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution. The fact is that the government has been waging war and engaging in various police actions, without formal declarations of war, with an increasing frequency since after the conclusion of World War II (the last declared war). This pattern of ignoring the Constitution, however, will have to wait for some future column, to discuss more fully.

Another reason for my ambivalence is that while there may have been some very good and practical reasons to go into Iraq, was it the right choice at the right time? On that, I’ll give a definite “maybe”. The reality is that only time will determine if going into Iraq was the right choice. As far as those legitimate reasons for going in, I don’t think that President Bush and his administration have very effectively articulated them, which explains the rather low public support the president has seen, as of late.

I certainly don’t fault the President over the issue of WMD’s. The fact that they haven’t been found does not mean that they didn’t exist. With all of the time given Saddam to comply with inspectors before we ultimately attacked, it is not inconceivable that the weapons were spirited out of Iraq, and into Syria, or even Iran. It isn’t like there wasn’t plenty of opportunity for this to have happened - and it would certainly account for the absence of those weapons, a fact that surprised even the most liberal of Democrats.

The reality is that the weapons of mass destruction were not the only, or even the primary reason for us to consider ousting Saddam. It is in this area where Bush has done a poor job of outlining his position. The most important reason for going in, was that it was a cornerstone of Bush’s strategy in prosecuting the war on terror. In addition to eliminating a dictator, who by all accounts possessed WMD’s and the willingness to use them, Iraq also was very important geographically – important because a liberated Iraq cuts off the path between Syria and Iran. With an already liberated Afghanistan to its east, Iran is flanked now on its west by the new Saddam-free Iraq. Given Iran’s nuclear aspirations, the significance of this cannot be overlooked.

Now whether one agrees with this strategy, or whether indeed it should have been Bush’s next step after Afghanistan or not, the fact is that we are there – and that one simple truth must necessarily take precedence over one’s personal opinion of the Iraq military action. We must complete the mission – to withdraw now before the Iraqis are in a position to take care of themselves militarily would be foolhardy, and a slap to the face of those who have served there – including those who have given the ultimate sacrifice. In addition, what would deserting the Iraqis at this point say to the rest of the world about us?

Those pushing for withdrawal now, keep making comparisons with VietNam. Iraq however, is most assuredly not VietNam, despite what some wish to claim. The casualties thus far, while regrettable, are not unexpected, and are far lower than what was experienced in previous conflicts. The mission itself is quite achievable, if a little more time-consuming than what a spoiled public would like.

Don’t misunderstand - I have concerns as well. The action in Iraq has put a strain on us militarily. Our troop strength has been stretched thin, and having an all volunteer military at a time when those serving are more at risk, will not exactly bring in tons more of recruits. Withdrawal from Iraq needs to occur, but in a timeframe that makes sense. I’m not proposing a “schedule” for withdrawal, and I’m not suggesting the administration do so either – announcing a plan publicly would very likely do nothing more than encourage the very terrorists we’re seeking to eliminate.

The President and his advisors have the data to formulate a withdrawal strategy, and in fact, probably already have done so. When the time is right, we will very likely see some sort of phased withdrawal as the Iraqis become increasingly self-reliant. Until then, despite the hysterics emanating from some quarters, the mission will continue – as it should.

=====================================================