Iraq: Should we be there?

There probably hasnt been a single day since March 2003, that any of us hasnt been able to turn on the TV and on some channel, be able to find someone protesting the war in Iraq. Certain names or words come to mind whenever I think of that.

Cindy Sheehan, 4000 servicemembers killed, WMD's, etc. etc.

Im sure most of you would think of the same and probably more. As Ive mentioned in previous blogs, there probably isnt a single person in this nation that doesnt know somebody or know OF somebody that currently serves or has served in the military. Chances are that that person served in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.

Iraq has become a very controversial subject when it comes to matters of politics. Most people, when they talk about it are completely convinced that we either should or should not be there, Depending on what your values are, what you've experienced in your life and how you see the world. Im probably one of the biggest advocates FOR free speech. I have been constantly reminded that my tongue will get me into trouble someday. I can tell you it already has. My tongue has been my greatest weakness. But it has also been my greatest strength.

I have no problem with voicing my opinion. I believe that "if you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything". The fact that I voice my opinion, specifically when I think something is f*cked up, kept me from being promoted to Staff Sergeant for a year while I was in the Army. But it DIDNT keep me from being one of the youngest Staff Sergeants in the 101st Airborne Division. I definitely moved up in rank very quickly during the time I was in the Army. I was a Sergeant at the age of 19 and a Staff Sergeant shortly after my 22nd birthday. (Remember I got held back for a year) When I was told by my platoon sergeant that he had decided not to send me to the "E-6 Board" because I needed to learn how to control what I said, it completely caught me off guard even though I should have expected it. Throughout the whole time I was in the Army, Ive had different levels of leadership tell me that my mouth was gonna come back and bite me in the ass. Sure enough it did. I didnt resent my platoon sergeant. Instead, my already high view of him only raised even more. Him and I were very good friends before he became my platoon sergeant and at work, we still maintained the professionalism needed to accomplish the mission. So when he told me that I would not be going before the board for promotion, I didnt take it personally. I decided that it was time for me to reflect on why I had this road block in front of me. Although Ive definitely learned to pick and choose my battles now, I still have that drive in me to stand up when things are going in the wrong direction. This time is no different. And THAT is why Im writing this blog.

I completely understand the pain that a parent,sibling, spouse or grandparent must feel when their loved one is lost in battle. It is a demoralizing feeling that the first human instinct is to find someone to blame. The problem with the war in Iraq is that for some people, the person (or persons) to blame may at times be unclear. Alot of people blame President Bush. Their defending argument is that we went in there for oil. That because the Bush family has a history in the petroleum business, it is a definite fact that they went in there to seek out the many oil reserves that Iraq contains. Although this argument sounds almost convincing, I believe that it is simply not true. President Bush may not have been as eloquent or as well spoken as President Obama, but he certainly is no fool. I had the honor to meet President Bush two years ago and I can tell you personally that he is intelligent as he is humorous. Another reason why Im convinced that the war in Iraq was not motivated by interests in oil is because with the constant exposure that the media provides, any possible hint of such a thing would have been exposed like the whole Monica Lewinsky thing. And that was because the media LIKED President Clinton. Imagine how they would been with President Bush, someone who they clearly could not stand.

Another "reason" that people usually come up with for our involvement in Iraq is WMD's. Well...That one I'll leave alone. I wholeheartedly believe that in time, people will see that Bush wasnt completely full of shit. Understand that a hell of a lot more happens over there than what the media will show and a hell of alot more happens over there that civilians back home wouldnt be able to understand or accept.

The point of this blog posting is to explain a different side to the war in Iraq. Currently, one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) debates going on in politics is the possibility of a nationalized healthcare program made available to everyone in the United States. President Obama (whom I have not hidden the fact that Im not his biggest fan) is running around from townhall meeting to townhall meeting, touting how we have a "moral obligation" to provide for those less fortunate than we are. I COMPLETELY AGREE!!! But not at the expense of those that cannot afford it. Americans are generally a giving society. Although you wouldnt see this characteristic too often if you were to go to New York City. (Ironically one of the most liberal cities in the US and one of the biggest supporting communities for a nationalized healthcare program...Go Figure!!)

My point with the whole "moral obligation" thing is....If President Obama is so concerned about caring for those less fortunate than ourselves, then where was this compassion, better yet, where IS this compassion in regards to the Iraqi people? If anything, the Iraqis are FAR less fortunate than any American currently living within our borders. So if he is so concerned about the welfare of those less fortunate than ourselves, then why isnt he choosing to continue the fight in Iraq to bring Democracy there? Why isnt he choosing to stay there until "Mission Complete"? To stabilize the country. To finish bringing water to small towns that have never had running water. To establish security in a country that has been at war longer than most of us have been alive.

I will end this blog regarding our dilemma of whether or not we should stay in Iraq or not, with a few questions....

If the French wouldnt have intervened in the war between the American Colonies and the British, wouldnt we still be under British rule? Dont we have the same "moral obligation" to provide for those less fortunate than ourselves in another country as we do for the people of our own country? Or does the term moral only apply to situations that benefit us politically?

If the North had chosen not to intervene in the cessation of the South from the American Union, wouldnt blacks still be considered slaves?

I believe that the decision for the United States to intervene in Iraq to get rid of Saddam Hussein, was a correct decision. I spent two years over there and would spend another two if my presence there ensured that the Iraqi people could look forward to the same peace and security that we Americans so easily take for granted.