|
Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave, Suite 7313
New York, NY 10118
phone: (800) 704-6512
inquiry@thesyndicatednews.com
SSL Certs
|
Victory in Iraq
|
by Jack Nargundkar
TheSyndicatedNews columnist
Jack Nargundkar has been repeatedly published in Business Week, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. He is also an author of "The Bush Diaries" published in July 2005.
|
John S. McCain is now the official nominee of the Republican Party for president of the United States. If he wins the election in November, he will be sworn in as the new Commander-in-Chief on January 20, 2008 and assume ultimate responsibility for U.S. policy in Iraq. Senator McCain has consistently maintained that he will not withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq until victory has been achieved. With the presidential election less than two months away, it is about time Senator McCain clearly defined what he means by victory in Iraq.
Shortly after Baghdad fell, on April 12, 2003, the Washington Post published a letter of mine, in which I had defined victory in Iraq as follows:
“So it might behoove the Bush administration to refrain from popping the cork on the champagne right now, because as the classic saying goes: We might have won the battle (for Baghdad), but we have yet to win the war (rebuilding a safe, modern, democratic Iraq).”
If Senator McCain’s definition of victory is similar to what mine was back in April 2003, then I can understand why he is reluctant to talk about it. Because building a safe, modern, democratic Iraq still requires an open-ended commitment from the United States. The last time Senator McCain alluded to this during the primary campaign, he suggested that U.S. troops could be in Iraq for the next fifty to hundred years! But since making that impetuous comment at a town-hall meeting in New Hampshire in January 2008, Senator McCain has realized that while such “straight talk” helped him win his party’s primaries, it is unlikely to help him win the general election – especially where the Iraq war is concerned.
Nevertheless, Maverick McCain repeated this famous line from the primaries, “I’d rather lose an election than see my country lose a war” during his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last week. However, he smartly refrained from elaborating what an actual victory in Iraq meant for the country – probably recognizing that such candor could very well jeopardize his own chances for victory in the general election. It’s become a Catch-22 for Senator McCain: he wants to lead his country to victory in Iraq, but he can’t say exactly what victory is, because then he might not get elected to lead it to his mysterious victory. So, in essence, what he is telling the American public amounts to: “Hey, trust me, I have fought for this country before and I can lead it to victory in Iraq – but I cannot tell you what that is and how I will get it done – you’ll just have to trust me.”
Most Americans recognize that the U.S. military has won all of its major battles in Iraq, including the latest one, which required a surge of troops starting in January 2007, to quell an out-of-control insurgency. Notwithstanding these numerous tactical military victories, it’s apparent that the victory that Senator McCain desires in Iraq is a broader geopolitical one, which requires that a substantial number of U.S. troops remain in Iraq for the long-term. Unfortunately, this is a concept that does not sit well with a majority of the war-weary American public. Hence, Senator McCain’s prefers a more nebulous definition of victory – a notion, however vague, no patriot can reject, and which Senator McCain fully understands and exploits. It’s no wonder that Senator Obama, the Democratic nominee, countered with these obvious words in his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention on August 28th:
“So I've got news for you, John McCain: We all put our country first.”
It would behoove Senator McCain to credit the American public with a little more intelligence. The U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein’s government and occupied Iraq almost five years ago. Since then, Iraq has elected its own government, which is now run by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. 15 of the 18 benchmarks set by Congress to measure security, political and economic progress in Iraq following the surge, have been met. Anbar, once the cradle of the Sunni insurgency, became the 11th Iraqi province to revert to Iraqi control last week. If Senator McCain would like to keep U.S. troops in Iraq until all 18 benchmarks have been met and all 18 provinces transferred to Iraqi control – he should come out and say so with his characteristic “straight talk” of old. More importantly, he should specify – this is what constitutes victory in Iraq, no matter how long it takes!
Having said that, it is high time Senator McCain stopped conflating victory in Iraq with any perceived or pending demands on the U.S. military. The U.S. troops have more than fulfilled their obligations and can come home anytime with the full honor that they deserve. In fact, President Bush is on the verge of negotiating a time frame for withdrawal of U.S. troops with Prime Minister Maliki – a timeline that bears close resemblance to what Senator Obama has long proposed.
Finally, here is my personal suggestion to both candidates: If you really want to put your country first, why don’t the both of you pledge to take Iraq off the table as a “political football” until after Election Day? It would go a long way in maintaining current progress and ensuring an eventual strategic and geopolitical victory in Iraq for the United States. Yes, Country First!
Published: Sep 8,2008 15:08
|
Andy Cowan
Andy Cowan, an award-winning writer, whose credits include Cheers and Seinfeld, regularly contributes humor pieces to the Los Angeles Times and the CBS Jack FM Radio Network.
Paul M. J. Suchecki
Paul M. J. Suchecki has more than 30 years of experience as an award winning writer, producer, and cameraman. He's written numerous newspaper and magazine articles. Currently he writes, produces and shoots for LA CityView Channel 35 and his more than 250 articles for Ehow.com are approaching half a million readers.
Coby Kindles
Coby Kindles is a freelance journalist, screenplay writer and essayist. She has been a staff writer at Knight Ridder and a regular contributor to The Associated Press.
Debbie Milam
Debbie Milam is a syndicated columnist for United Press International, an occupational therapist, family success consultant, and motivational speaker with more than 20 years experience. Her work on stress management, spirituality, parenting, and special-needs children has been featured in over 300 media outlets including First for Women, The Miami Herald, Elle, Ladies Home Journal, The Hallmark Channel, PBS and WebMD.
Dan Rafter
Dan Rafter has covered the residential real estate industry for more than 15 years. He has contributed real estate stories to the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Business 2.0 Magazine, Home Magazine, Smart HomeOwner Magazine and many others.
Jack Nargundkar
Jack Nargundkar has been repeatedly published in Business Week, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. He is also an author of "The Bush Diaries" published in July 2005.
|