Victor Davis Hanson’s rightful excoriation of Agence France-Presse is yet another reminder of the historical whitewashing under way. Until perhaps a future time, when less ideological historians prevail, we’re going to be treated to narratives about the Iraq war very much like AFP’s. Lost will be two fundamental realities: First, we won the war. Second, we prevailed against not one but two medieval tyrannies.
Except for the rarest exceptions, those who did not go to war simply do not understand first the horror of the Hussein regime and second the horror of al-Qaeda in Iraq’s control over vast sections of the country. While there’s fairly broad consensus that AQI’s horrors were inflicted because of our own strategic failures early in the war (I’m not so sure), the reality of the horror can’t be doubted. In our own Area of Operations (AO) — which had been long controlled by AQI before we arrived — female suicide bombers terrorized civilians, and AQI fighters would slaughter men, women, and children who opposed them. Their favorite tactics included beheading women on tape while shrieking “Allah Akhbar” like they were scoring goals in a soccer match, shooting infants in the face in front of their mothers, and concealing bombs in the backpacks of mentally handicapped children.
It was the great honor of my life to do the (very) little that a middle-aged JAG could do to help the heroes of 2d Squadron, 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment turn the tide in Diyala Province. While the cost was very, very great, our accomplishments were real. The Iraqis may or may not have liked us (opinions were mixed) or shared our values (the cultural differences were vast), but no child should live under the terror of beheading or execution, and when we left hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were free men and women.
It’s the responsibility of those who came home to bear witness to the truth and to rebut the lies of the revisionists. And in that effort one can have few better allies than Professor Hanson.
Never hesitate to tell us more. Thank you for your service and your work--we're very, very grateful, and glad you're safe.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course, AFP is still reporting that the English failed at Agincourt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe sacrifices of our servicemembers bought them the freedom to burn any d@38 flag they want to burn. Freedom isn't the natural state of man; it's dearly bought and rarely kept. I hope they hang onto it. As for AFP and the Euro Elite... well, they had their chance. I couldn't care less what happens to Europe.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRe: First, we won the war...when we left hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were free men and women."
Uh...and hundreds of thousands of other Iraqis are also dead. Hundreds of thousands more displaced, the country's' infrastructure was destroyed, Christians persecuted and driven out, cities partitioned into sectarian ghettos, a corrupt government was installed and we dropped a TRILLION bucks in the process.
You call that winning?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI love the way our neo-isolationists have to keep trotting out lie after lie in there efforts to prove that US can never do anything right.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo you don't agree that the country's infrastructure was destroyed, or that we dropped a trillion bucks on the venture, or that Iraq's Christian population has been decimated? Which one of the costs he listed counts as a "lie" in your book, given that everything he said is incontrovertably true (possible exception being the Iraqi death toll, which is a more controversial point)? And what do you know about his "isolationism"? Is opposition to that particular war necessarily isolationist? Or do you just like throwing around words with no care as to their meaning?
The fact is, the Iraq war was not a case of the USG "doing something right," even if it did every single other thing right.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe claim that we destroyed Iraq's infrastructure is a lie. The claim that we killed hundreds of thousands is a lie.
Having read SteveM for quite awhile, I know a lot about his isolationist, the US is always wrong, tendencies.
The Iraq war is an example of doing something right, by any rational measure. The fact that Obama chose to throw away our victory not withstanding.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat SteveM wrote. Additionally, one must point out that AQI did not exist before the U.S. invasion. If one reads French's piece without looking elsewhere, one might conclude that AQI did exist. Lazy minds might even add the need to rid Iraq of AQI to the list of post-invasion rationales for the whole thing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAl Qaeda was in Iraq prior to the war. And, even if they weren't, a defeat of Al Qaeda anywhere isn't a victory? Talk about a lazy mind.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseZarqawi spent time in Iraq prior to the U.S. invasion. AQI itself did not exist. It was made possible by the invasion. Victory over Al Qaeda is good anywhere. No one here said it wasn't. However, if you want to call the clash of US forces and AQI a victory for the U.S., that would be one thing. That does not make the whole venture a "victory". Since the U.S. lost over 4,000 people, blew a trillion dollars, displaced a couple million folks, and killed many others, all to make Iraq what it is today, well, I think labeling the whole miserable venture a "victory" is callous. Yep, Saddam, Reagan's great ally, is gone. But so are so many other folks who were doing nothing but getting on with their lives. .
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBy your criteria our victories over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan weren't "victories" either due to the loss of life on both sides. So, I guess those "miserable ventures" didn't work out either, huh? And, what about Libya where many innocent people? No one here is celebrating war. No one is being callous here, especially about the loss of American lives. However, to discount what Americans did in Iraq is callous and a reflection of an ideology that hopes openly for American defeat.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJapan attacked the U.S. Nazi Germany was bent on invading countries until it was stopped. Thus, defeating those two countries was an act of self-defense by the U.S. Reagan's ally Saddam did not attack the U.S., and had no capacity to try to take over the world. Another fact: the U.S. emerged from WWII as the most powerful country probably in the history of countries. Bush's disastrous foray left us more vulnerable, broke, and overstretched than we have been since assuming the mantle of world leadership. Other than those facts, your analogy stands up well.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSteveM,
Where exactly do you get your Iraqi citizen casualty figures? Numbers I have read show the numbers of Iraqi citizens killed much lower. And while we have, to my great regret, killed Iraqi citizens, the brutality inflicted on them by their former regime and the Muslim criminals and terrorists who came behind pales in comparison. If you have been to Iraq (and I am just guessing you have not) you would see that the infastructure of the country was already in shambles after decades of neglect. In fact, America and her coalition allies have done more for the rebuilding of Iraqi infastructure than any destruction we may have caused. Even in 2005, when kinetic action was still prevelant, we were supporting many projects to rebuild Fallujah, put it citizens back to work and try to bring a sense of normalcy to that city. As to your points about Christian persecution and partioned sectarian ghetto's, that phenomenon was occuring long before we invaded. And if the government is corrupt, the free men and women of Iraq can vote them the hell out. Not an option they had available to them before we made it possible.
Mr. French, as a fellow veteran of the war, I would like to thank you for your service and for your work at NRO. God Bless you and your family.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSteveM, I think you're confusing Iraq with Vietnam, which most reactionary left wingers do. The left still claims credit for our defeat in Vietnam and millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians paid for it with their lives. Despite the left's best efforts, we won in Iraq. Iraqis have a real chance at freedom - thanks to us - if they're smart enough to take it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSteve M: Except for the part about a corrupt government being installed, the same thing could be said about Germany or Japan after WWII. And if you keep in the part about a corrupt government, we could be talking about the American South after the Civil War.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIraq, like any other place crudely ruled by force throughout its history, is a modern-era paradox. Invade, and become entangled in a deranged society split between a populace taught to live in fear and a massive, tribally entrenched criminal caste. Let alone, and that cultural abomination festers while it twists technology to unthinkable ends. Responsible nations that value security can only delay paying the unfair and thankless price for so long.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Until perhaps a future time, when less ideological historians prevail, we’re going to be treated to narratives about the Iraq war very much like AFP’s."
So, in other words, the AFP's account of the history of Fallujah is already set in stone.
Historians have never been less ideological. It is, however, a relatively recent phenomenon that their ideology was so decidedly against their own nation's actions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Except for the rarest exceptions, those who did not go to war simply do not understand first the horror of the Hussein regime and second the horror of al-Qaeda in Iraq’s control over vast sections of the country."
Unfortunately, they do understand the horror of these regimes. They just don't care.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks for your service.
I wonder if the Iraq war might have been better fought if:
1) We used a larger force, 2) We imposed an interim constitution quickly, 3) We held elections quickly, 4) We kept the old police while forcing more Shias in, 5) We left within 6 months - 1 year.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseVDH's point is hard to argue since it's very specific and factual, but to state that the "fundamental reality" in Iraq is that "we won the war" is ludicrous.
The fundamental reality is that we've been engaged in a military action in Iraq that has now gone on for over 20 years, and will go on for many years to come despite what we decide to label it. That followed a decade where we actively supported Iraq in it's illegal invasions of its neighbors and supplied them with conventional, biological, and chemical weapons materials.
The fundamental reality is that over a decade of economic sanctions destroyed their infrastructure and economy, resulted in the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, primarily little children, while our Western allies and Saddam mutually enriched themselves with the oil for palaces scam.
The fundamental reality is that Iraq never attacked the United States and was never a threat to the United States. If anything our invasion of Iraq is a huge net negative to the long-term security of the US.
The fundamental reality is that this has cost us trillions of dollars, thousands of US soldier's lives, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian lives. The damage to the standing of the US and its credibility and influence worldwide will never recover to its pre-2003 levels, as the vast majority of the world can see this pretty clearly for what it was. We never had any business in Iraq.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse