I’m Glad I’m Just An Optometrist
I don’t recall having written much, if anything, in this blog about Iraq. I tend to keep my peace on things about which I know little. But against my better judgment, I hereby break my silence.
These days it’s hard to find many insightful pieces about Iraq that aren’t leaden down with emotionalism and bile. However, I ran across one written by James Wiser, a librarian at Pepperdine University with whom I’ve recently had a playful verbal joust regarding Alabama’s hiring of Nick Saban.
On the heels of that comes a very scholarly and even-handed piece on Iraq and just-war doctrine written by former Navy officer Chris Dowd which appeared recently in Commonweal. Since I’m neither of the non-violence come-what-may stripe nor a pre-Constantinian romanticist, Dowd’s bona fides as a Christian, reluctant warrior and believer in just-war doctrine grabbed my attention.
Basically, he makes a compelling case that when it comes to the tenets of classical just-war theory, the Iraq invasion fails on nearly every count. I highly recommend printing out the article and taking time to digest it in full, but here’s a money quote that really hit home with me:
Writing this essay has been a difficult task. I supported Bush in the 2000 election. In the days after 9/11, I fully supported our military action in Afghanistan, and still do. Moreover, I was inclined to believe the Bush administration’s assertions about Iraq in 2002 and early 2003 and to trust its case for war. Though I never thought the criterion of last resort was met, Colin Powell’s appearance before the UN on February 5, 2003, did much to convince me that the time had come for military action. I believed there must be intelligence, too secret to share with the world, that justified it. I trusted that the administration was making morally responsible decisions, even as I wept over what would ensue when the bombs began to fall.
Dowd’s thinking during that period of late 2002 and early 2003 eerily reflects my own during that same time. I felt that our actions in Afghanistan were clearly justified under just-war doctrine, but I had serious misgivings regarding the plans to invade Iraq. Still, I wanted to give the Bush administration the benefit of the doubt, figuring that they had access to information that they couldn’t fully share.
It would appear to me that my trust was misplaced. Still, like James, I recognize there are no easy answers to this quagmire–neither 20,000 more troops nor complete and immediate withdrawal would seem appropriate solutions to the problem at this point. When it comes to Iraq, there never were, presently aren’t, and never will be any easy and tidy answers.
James put it this way: “I still have no idea what I’d do. I’m glad I’m a librarian.”
I hear you, Malibu Librarian. I’m glad I’m just an optometrist.
10 Comments
Comments are closed.
kenny simpson
Good article. I feel much the same way, but now what do we do?
Laymond
Good post, seems reality is seeping into the conversation all around the country, even Texas
Mark Elrod
I’m proud to claim James (JA) as one of the finest products of our political science department at Harding. It’s a shame that he’s thrown it all away to stack books for the rest of his life…
I’m impressed by the fact that more and more people of faith are using this opportunity to look at the value of war and especially the JWD to evaluate when and where to use military force to resolve political or security problems. In the case of Iraq, it has become clear that the use of military force has only served to create a more complicated political situation in the entire region. My own inclination is to still believe that the administration was driven by the domestic political value of bringing down Saddam without considering what the unraveling of the political structure of Iraq would mean in the long-run.
Have a safe trip to Searcy.
Hal
Excellent comments. It gripes me to no end to hear blatant criticism from congressmen and the press, but no one is proposing any solutions except the president. The solutions may not be ideal, but the administration is the only body out there with any proposals at all. And, regardless of whether or not the Iraq war was justified in the first place, we are up to our hips muck now.
The other thing that has struck me is that all of the recent complaints and comments are regarding the proposal to build up troops (to a level far less than the peak just over a year ago). No one out there seems to be commenting on the shift in policy to protect the Iraqi people. Why?
Notice that I don’t offer any solutions either. I’m also glad to be just an optometrist.
JRB
Hal, in long running efforts, several of us in the cyber-Christian community have long been discussing options. Please follow the link to my site, then to Hermit Greg’s, to see two or three concrete options that people other than the President are suggesting. Greg in particular pays very close attention to moral policy in Iraq to reduce Iraqi deaths.
If anything the proposal by the President is the one option that does not place reducing Iraqi deaths at the top of its prioritized outcomes.
(For bona fides, Mark Elrod taught me, although I was in the BJW (before James Wiser) Era, so we have some schooling on this topic. I’m glad I’m just a law professor.)
Mark Elrod
Two alternatives of note that have been suggested for Iraq are the findings of the Iraq Study Group and the Levin-Reid Amendment for phased withdraw.
It’s one thing for the WH to say that “nobody is presenting other options” and another to ignore the options that have been suggested.
JRB: Bona fide? More like the kiss of death…
Mark Elrod
“Levin-Reed”; my bad.
Mike the Eyeguy
Thank you all for your comments and input. Good grief, if I keep this up, maybe someday I’ll have a real blog. 🙂
Here’s another thought I’ve had. When I heard about our recent targeted strikes v. Al Qaeda in Somalia, I recall thinking, “Now that’s the kind of war I thought we were going to fight.”
And for a while it seemed that we did stick to the unconventional methods that President Bush spoke of in those early post-911 days. From CIA agent and North Alabama native Johnny “Mike” Spann (click here), the first United States combat causality who died with his gun drawn while interrogating Taliban prisoners, to Deltas and other special forces types wearing beards and riding horses, it seemed like we were determined to do what it took to bring to justice those responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
In retrospect, I should have known something was up when President Bush began insisting–too strongly it seemed–that the measure of success could not be judged by whether or not Bin Laden was killed or captured. As it turns out, he had already committed resources that could have been used in that effort toward an entirely different “enemy” all together.
Laurie
I watched Colin Powell’s presentation to the UN and thought, “Oh, I hope we have more to go on than this.”
Then I watched the invasion of Baghdad and thought, “We’re going into a completely repressive society and eliminating the army, the law enforcement, and the judiciary. There will suddenly be no consequences for behavior in this society for the first time in years. This is the ultimate recipe for anarchy. But surely they have a plan for dealing with this.”
I was wrong on both counts.
After 9/11 we had the sympathy of the world. We had the opportunity to go into the madrassas, which at that point were the only educational opportunity for thousands and thousands of boys in this area of the world, and which taught only a warped version of the Koran. This was probably the only point in history where we would have ben welcomed into this society. We could have changed things, offered real education, real opportunities.
But instead we declered war on Iraq. And now, as the bumper sticker says, “We are creating enemies faster than we can kill them.”
There are no longer any good options. Everything any politician offers up at this point is futile. We had an opportunity, and we blew it.
Mike the Eyeguy
I’ve read Powell’s first biography from the mid 90s. I noticed there’s another one now. I would like to read it and Powell’s recollection (and explanation) of that fateful day in February 2003.
I wish that I could be more optimistic than you, Laurie. But choosing the lesser of evils has never been harder it seems.