Goose the Blog 2.0

I keep hearing it repeated that Iraq is a disaster, a quagmire and “another Vietnam”. But the death tolls in Vietnam were far higher, without any demonstrable gains. What is the Metric being used to compare them? (No, that isn’t a rhetorical question.)

1000s of Americans Dead after over a year of fighting is bad? In Comparison to any other American conflict, or World Conflict in recent history the War in Iraq is an exceptional result. Or, if you want, compare it to the “peace” in the U.S. with 658 murders in Los Angeles (L.A. Has roughly a 3rd of the population of Iraq). On the Dick Cavett show, Kerry argued there would be no bloodbath if U.S troops were removed from Vietnam (he was very wrong), and that ONLY 4000-5000 people would be killed. These were acceptable losses to Kerry given the death tolls and refugee situation in Vietnam and Laos at the time. Of course there are valid criticisms to be made, as no human endeavor is perfect. Overall the cost is far lower than anyone would reasonably have expected.

The abuse at Abu-Ghraibe is lamentable and unpardonable, but compared to what happens in our prisons here at home or the abuses of Iraqis under Saddam’s leadership, how bad is it in perspective?

WMD is hailed as being THE reason the U.S.A. went to war, but there wasn’t just one Reason. Re-reading the State of the Union Address should make that clear. As to the discussion of Niger and Yellowcake, the Senate Intelligence Report shows that Joe Wilson lied in many of his statements, his trip to Niger added to the evidence that Iraq had attempted to purchase Yellowcake, and the Bush Administration did not coerce a particular result from the CIA. Likewise, Lord Butler’s report shows the presence of Al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to the war and vindicates Bush’s statements in the State of the Union Address. Not that the DNC will admit it….I guess the democrats on the commissions are liars too? Meanwhile the 9/11 Commission report was widely mis-reported to conclude that there was no connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, when in fact it presents quite a bit of evidence for a non-collaborative co-operation between the groups and only concludes that Iraq did not take direct part in the planning of 9/11. (just like Germany did not take part in the planning for Pearl Harbor) Meanwhile evidence has surfaced that something was moved into Syria just before the War. The Real criticism of President Bush should be his inability to find and secure the weapons, rather than the assumption that an absence of proof is proof of absence.

Unilateral (adj) : action taken without the okay-doky of Germany or France. The U.S. “unilateral” coalition includes the following countries: Australia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey, Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain (until terrorism threatened at home) , and the United Kingdom

Also commonly overlooked in the war on Iraq are the cost of enforcing the no-fly zone and Saddam Hussein’s frequent attacks on our Air Force. More importantly the effect sanctions had on access to food and medicine was devastating. For instance, 40,000 more children under the age of 5 died per year after sanctions from lack of proper medical care. Of course this situation was made worse when humanitarian aid was impeded by corruption in the U.N. via the “Oil for Food” program. The Kay report shows that Saddam had intent to develop WMDs and an end to sanctions with Saddam still in power would have allowed him to do so. The war ended sanctions and removed Saddam. The U.N. imposed Sanctions also increased the difficulty of rebuilding the country, though significant progress has been made.

Meanwhile, many complain that the War has resulted on a trampling of our civil rights via the Patriot Act, and Free Speech zones.
The Price of Freedom is viligence, and we should always treat each new piece of legislation of this nature with suspicion,. However compared to the measures taken during World War II against the Germans, Japanese and Italians, or with what Lincoln did during the Civil War, the Patriot Act seems very mild. The Free Speech Zones have removed protestors from those they are protesting, and potentially violated their right of free speech. However, if one wants to condemn the practice, even when it is upheld by law, they should be condemning it whenever it is used : By President Bush, By the Democratic National Convention this year, or its rampant use within our institutions of learning where they are used to enforce politically correct speech codes. Of course, it is possible the removal of such protest zones to remote locations may in fact protect the public order as the 2000 DNC Convention and its aftermath illustrate.