I stretched back in the chaise and closed my eyes. It was a clear morning with the temperature hovering in the mid 80's. Lying in the sun, it was comfortably toasty and far preferable, for the moment, to watching a football game.
Every so often, a wind eddy would approach from the west. I could hear it coming through the neighboring trees. The wind chimes celebrated its movement across the yard and then the trees once more signalled its gradual departure, as the silence gave way to other relaxing sounds.
The birds were busy chatting as they ate at the feeder across the lawn. Occasionally, I could hear the sound of one of the horses in the area, probably asking for a workout which - for some reason - rarely seemed to come.
Then a plane went by, low, taking off from the Perris Airport with another load of skydivers, and the noise was accentuated by a passing four-wheeler on its way to the nearby fields.
As the silence returned, my thoughts drifted back to the Sunday paper and I was overwhelmed by the dichotomy between my peaceful paradise and the reality of existence in Iraq.
Far from a life of lounging in chaises, skydiving, four-wheeling or watching weekend games, the people of Iraq must mainly be concentrating on just staying alive, I thought.
The latest casualty estimate pegs total Iraqi deaths at 150,000, and it is based simply on the observations of the number of dead each day.
Iraq's south in particular has come under the influence of rival Shiite Muslim militias lately, with anti-U.S. agendas.
Yesterday, police in Najaf discovered a cache of antitank rockets, armor piercing weapons and mortars hidden in the cemetery, of all places.
In Baghdad, two car bombs exploded near the main market, killing eight civilians and injuring 37. These were just two more of what has become a continuing series of bombings in the area that have stiffled the local economy.
A roadside bomb in an upscale Sunni Muslim neighborhood in central Baghdad caused more death and injuries.
In west Baghdad, another roadside bomb killed three and injured three.
At the same time, a convoy of mini buses carrying civilians south of Baghdad was attacked by gunmen. Many of the occupants were killed and an additional fifty were reported to have been kidnapped. These are more than likely dead by now.
Assassins killed a police sergeant in East Baghdad and an official in Iraq's intelligence service in South Baghdad.
Iraqi police discovered the mutilated, bullet-ridden corpses of at least 24 men and women around the capital.
Gunmen killed two bodyguards of a former member of parliament in an east Baghdad shootout that left four people wounded, including the politician.
Suicide bombers rammed U.S. military convoys near Taji, 20 miles north of the capital, as well as in East Baghdad.
Such was life and death, on a November Saturday in Iraq.
And, on top of these daily acts of violence, it is now reported that theft, corruption and mismanagement have drained the health resources in the country. Further, hundreds of doctors have been killed and thousands have fled. This, despite the fact that American taxpayers have infused nearly $1/2 billion into the Iraqi healthcare system.
As I guiltily abandoned my comfortable perch, I wondered, how anyone could think that there is any way to win this war.
It isn't a even a war, by any definition. There is not an identifiable enemy army. There are no territorial battles.
The insurgents plant their bombs, in most cases, and fade away in the shadows, unididentifiable and anonymous.
What would the definition of a "victory" possibly be?
If it is peace between the warring factions, then it's quite obvious that our presence will have no bearing on that outcome, other than to continue to aggravate the situation, in all probability.
The Iraq Study Group, under James Baker and Lee Hamilton is expected to meet with President Bush tomorrow. The committee has not finalized its recommendations, and, in fact, Tony Blair is planning to give evidence to it later this week.
Blair is expected to say that he favors diplomatic approaches to Iran and Syria and to give his opinion that peace in Iraq is contingent upon Israel working out a peace agreement with the Palestinians.
I sincerely hope the committee recommends that American military personnel be immediately removed from making dangerous patrols and be placed in the capacity of training Iraqis, subject to their phased withdrawal.
Secondly, I hope that no decision relative to the safety of our troops is contingent on a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians,
Nearly every president since Jimmy Carter has nearly knocked himself out to try and accomplish such a peace. And every time a forward step is made, one party or the other breaks its word and takes the process two steps backwards.
In recent weeks, as in the period leading up to its failed invasion of Lebanon, it has been the Israelis committing a series of acts against the virtually imprisoned citizens of the Gaza Strip. This has culminated in the killing, last week, of sixteen members of one of the Strip's largest and most respected middle class families and the wounding of 19 others. Many of the dead and maimed were children.
Israel said it was a "mistake," but - frankly - we have heard that excuse too many times, and it's wearing thin.
On Saturday, the U.N. attempted to condemn Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip and demand a withdrawal of Israeli troops. The United States was the only country to oppose it, and John Bolton used his veto power to kill the resolution.
History has told us that there is not much we can do about Israel's problems, and certainly we should continue to be that country's ally, but I believe we should do so on the condition that they act more responsibly.
And, in no event, should Israel's situation have anything to do with getting our troops in Iraq out of harm's way.


Comments: 19
Personally I think they thought they could eventually win this god forsaken land and it's inhabitants over a long time ago. We have been an ally of Israel for a long time now - but I agree with you - the last big war actions against innocents have been declared as a mistake...and I don't think they want us to think they are that stupid!...I also feel, Israels problems need to stay their own as do Palestine, and Iraq. We are fighting a loosing battle for them and for the wrong reason....Mr. Bolton decision just re-enforce our being Aggressive Power to the world and a country not to be trusted. We are asking others to do what we will not - how stupid is that....I to support your commenting in no event should Israels situation have anything to do with getting our troops in Iraq out of harms way. Excellent article...!
We'll all have to be vociferous in our efforts to get him [Bolton] to heck out of there, PDQ, before he does ever more damage for "you know who" -- who just stood before God and cameras, over Rummy's body, and promised to work towards a constructive and open solution."
Guess we have to keep in mind that certain words--like constructive, cooperative, OPEN [read or google up the Military Commissions Act of 2006], VICTORY, etc., can be very subject to interpretation.
As for Tony Blair, he's probably thrilled to be giving evidence to the Iraq Study Group, having just narrowly escaped the possee on his tail in jolly old England. Maybe they'll catch him yet, but I doubt it because he's making nice with international environmentalists on global warming and we need him for that and a few other things. Too bad he agreed to bomb the be'jesus out of Iraq before he decided to become the enlightened voice on international diplomacy. But then, it was never about terrorism or WMD, was it! It was about strategic position and oil. Some tried to say that--but they were shouted down by cries of--well we all know the page and verse by now.
For a look at the uglier but very real side of international politics--find the clip--the whole clip--shown on "Currents" TV [& probably on YouTube] where our Prez gives the chancellor of Germany a shoulder rub and gives Tony Blair a mouthful.
So call or email your congress people. Let them know what you think about the WAR on TERRORISM--how it's gone so far--and whether you think there's a connection between oil, global warming and terror.
I personally wouldn't don't want to see out troops being being "backed up" by the warring militias we're trying to "train up."
Concerning Israel...there was talk by the Bush White House at the beginning of the year of starting a drawdown in troop levels...than came Lebanon. Now there is talk by the Democrats coming into the new Legislature of another drawdown and already Israel is threatening to attack Iran...if we leave it up to Israel we will never get out of the Middle East...every attempt at a withdrawal will be followed by an Israeli stirring up of more discord to bind us in the Middle East. The killing of the resolution condemning Israel for it's continued attacks on the Palestinian people would have happened with Pelosi's blessing...whether the Republicans or Democrats are at the levers of power when it comes to Israel nothing changes. Both parties have put the security of Israel above any other considerations...even the well-being of the troops. Israel wants the total defeat of Iraq, Syria and Iran...they will do everything they can to ensure the the coalition troops do not leave the Middle East until this is effected. On Israel's part there's nothing wrong with that...it's merely looking out for it's own national security...but, is it in the best interest of the national security of the U.S.A and the U.K. This is the question that must be addressed. What price are we willing to pay for the security of another nation...how many lives are we willing to sacrifice?
We need to start thinking about America first, second and always. The national security of the U.S.A. should be our' foremost priority...not that of any other nation.
Our presence in Iraq turned a corner for the worse during the first year of occupation (03-04). Harnessing the power and intelligence of the Iraqi people somehow took a back seat to the whims and dictates of the boneheaded administration of Paul Bremer. The insurgency was spawned and US presence was increasingly seen by many Iraqis as part of the problem instead of the solution.
So the tax payer gets stuck with the bill, and the mess. These messes were caused by high crimes and the people who made those decisions should be marched to the gallows.
That number is a misnomer- it's a toss out number designed for it's shock value.
Jim- you've got a compelling point, but let's take a look further into that number...
1] The number is pure estimate- The Hopkins report specifically states this.
2] 55,000 are disease related- Washington Post/ John Hopkins stated fact.
3] Iraqi government spokesman Ali Dabbagh said in a statement that "these numbers are far from the truth, and the Iraqi government is making efforts to protect the Iraqi citizens from forces of terror."
4] "The research method used ... is a respected tool for calculating fatalities in situations where complete records are unlikely to be available." That's called "Statistical Data Compilation"- that means the numbers are manipulated.
5] Iraq Body Count puts the number of Iraqis killed since March 2003 at no more than 49,000. The Iraq Index, a Brookings Institution study that combines that with recent U.N. statistics, put the number of civilian deaths between May 2003 and Aug. 31, 2006, at 62,000. In June, after several weeks worth of interviews at Iraqi hospitals, morgues and government offices, the Los Angeles Times estimated that civilian deaths had reached 50,000.
6] "The mortality numbers that have been out there -- that, we know, is inaccurate and incomplete," said Sarah Leah Whitson, director for Middle East and North Africa program at Human Rights Watch.
7] The study uses 'raw' data numbers with past statistical data. The pre 2003 death data is 'calculated' to be 5.5 per 1000 per day... Current data is then compiled getting a 13.3 per 1000 per day. The statistical differences reaches this mythological 600,000+ death figure.
Everything hinges on the pre-war data.
Show me a country that has a 5.5 per 1000 per day death rate- especially the Middle East. Doesn't exist. Not even here in the USA.
I'm not gonna discount your views- the number if it were true is startlingly horrid.
Call me skeptical concerning the data manipulation- how they came up with their number says more than the number itself.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14055.htm
about Palestinian harrassment by Israel, and I am embarrassed to be associated with Israel in the eyes of the world. Because of our latest veto, we condemn ourselves to be hated as much as Israel is hated and as a result they have vowed now to kill EVERY American thay can just to show that our civilians mean no more to them than there's do to us. It bothers me the way we are automatically identified with Israel for everything that they do, and this draft would have put some distance between us in the eyes of the world, and now we are part of the avenging target.
I was sitting in my living room this morning looking out at the half an inch of snow on the ground and watching the drops of the melting snow on my roof coming down out the window in front of the big Birch tree like tears from the roof.
I was listing to Carl Levin on MSNBC saying that we needed to give Iraq to the Iraqis soon. We created a country for them and they need to step up and run it now. The US needs to leave soon so the Iraqis can run the country. If the Iraqis think that the US will stay there forever or for many years, then the Iraqis won't step up to run Iraq, but will depend on the US for support.
However, in my opinion, as the Iraqis have only known Dictators that ran the country for thousands of years, I feel that they will need the help from the US for awhile.
The question as I see it is for how long will the Iraqis need the help of the US to get the country of Iraq up and running well. I think a few more years at least.
Today's killing field(s): IRAQ and the SUDAN [don't think the latter are sitting on a whole lot of oil though so it looks like it's up to the NGO's and whatever help they can get from the UN].
How do we get out; and, the multi-multi-multi-billion dollar question is: how do we pay for it since the TAX word is forbidden--create a quickie "guest worker program" to grow the tax base?
What can stop the war at this point? Perhaps: Pelosi, Levin's et all adept negotiation with the emperor who wears no clothes, using post election results as best they can, along with public sentiment.
Speaking of public sentiment, anyone recall Bush's response in the Rumsfeld-Gates transition to a reporter's query re comparisons in Iraq with Viet Nam? Bush reminded everyone that, unlike Viet Nam, Iraq is being fought with VOLUNTEERS. Sounds like a bargaining chip-[club] to me. Where do we get the troops to both draw-down and keep on going--in a way that will save face for the emperor by making it all appear as a win-win for everyone: VERY CAREFULLY and NOT VERY QUICKLY, I'm afraid.
Today, Bush said he will not agree to the dem's timetable. And, in case anyone think he's really really finally seen the progressive light, only yesterday documents were filed in a detainee case [the detainee is here in the U.S.] whereby Bush gets to define whether this detainee is a "noncombatant"; hence, whether he will get due process.
Barring a huge on relentless public hue and cry [I think the public will be content more or less to rely on the Study Group], the compromise will probably be between "Now" and "Now and 10 yrs"--what do you want to bet the ultimate time frame will come to a head right smack around next election time?
I remain optimistic, however, that the public will weigh in on this....sooner rather than later.
But, do you think they WILL do that since the elephant in the room has been living with us for quite awhile?
We've effectively fallen down the rabbit hole in Iraq..... we went in under false pretenses and instead of improving life for the Iraqi's we've apparently made matters worse!! The problem is now how do we get out of this hole without drawing fire from every Muslim nation in the world instead of "JUST" Al Quaida?
Peace in the Middle East isn't going to happen until ALL parties are willing to talk to each other and we are NOT part of the Middle East so why can't we leave this problem up to the UN to mediate or broker. The UN may not be the most effective body but that's mainly because the US has spent so much time undermining any attempt by the security council and the General assembly to suggest or promote any action that doesn't directly benefit the US.
The UN had the potential to do so much good in the world, if only all of the member states had truely supported it. No group made up of so many diverse members will aggree on every policy proposal but it was a step in the right direction.... too bad we lost sight of the path!
******************************************************************
Sorry, Dave great article and as you can tell it hit some 'hot buttons'
Good point on the UN, Kathleen....No country has turned its back on that body to a greater extent than the U.S., even withholding payment of our share of the money due....but the greatest insult that we levelled was the appointment of Bolton as "ambassador." .....Some bad joke that was....