Las Vegas Sun

April 20, 2015

Currently: 76° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account


On balance, the Iraq war was worth it

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

Ten years ago this week, the United States led an invasion of Iraq with the explicit purpose of overthrowing Saddam Hussein. The preceding months had been filled with vehement protests against the impending war, expressed in editorials, in advertisements and in rallies so vast that some of them made it into “Guinness World Records.” With so many people against the invasion, who supported it?

Well, if you were like the great majority of Americans — you did. In February and March 2003, Newsweek’s polls showed 70 percent of the public in favor of military action against Iraq; Gallup and Pew Research Center surveys showed the same thing. Congress had authorized the invasion a few months earlier with strong bipartisan majorities; among the many Democrats voting for the war were Sens. John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

Though the Iraq war later became a favorite Democratic club for bashing George W. Bush, Republicans and Democrats alike had long understood that Hussein was a deadly menace who had to be forcibly eradicated. In 1998, President Bill Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act, making Hussein’s removal from power a matter of U.S. policy.

But bipartisan harmony was an early casualty of the war. Once it became clear that Hussein didn’t have the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons that were a major justification for the invasion, unity gave way to recrimination. It didn’t matter that virtually everyone — Republicans and Democrats, U.N. inspectors and CIA analysts, coalition allies and even Hussein’s own military officers — had been sure the WMDs would be found. Nor did it matter that Hussein had previously used WMDs to exterminate thousands of men, women and children. The temptation to spin an intelligence failure as a deliberate “lie” was politically irresistible.

When the relatively quick toppling of Hussein was followed by a long and bloody insurgency, opposition to the war intensified. But then came Bush’s “surge,” and the course of the war shifted dramatically for the better. By the time Bush left office, the insurgency was crippled, violence was down 90 percent and Iraqis were being governed by politicians they had voted for. It was far from perfect, but “something that looks an awful lot like democracy is beginning to take hold in Iraq,” Newsweek reported in early 2010. On its cover, the magazine proclaimed: “Victory at Last.”

And so it might have been, if America’s new commander in chief hadn’t been so insistent on pulling the plug.

In October 2011, President Barack Obama — overriding his military commanders, who had recommended keeping 18,000 troops on the ground — announced that all remaining U.S. servicemen would be out of Iraq by the end of the year. Politically, it was a popular decision. But abandoning Iraqis and their frail, fledgling democracy was reckless.

“It freed Prime Minister Nouri Maliki to be more of a Shiite sectarian than he could have been with the U.S. looking over his shoulder,” as military historian Max Boot observed this week. As Maliki moves against his Sunni opponents, some of them “are making common cause once again with al-Qaida in Iraq, which has recovered from its near-death experience” during the surge, Boot said. It is cold comfort that so many warned of such an outcome in 2011.

So was the Iraq war worth it? On that, Americans are a long way from a consensus. It is never clear in the immediate aftermath of any war what history’s judgment will be.

But this much we do know: The invasion of Iraq 10 years ago ended the reign of a genocidal tyrant and ensured that his monstrous sons could never succeed him. It struck a shaft of fear into other dictators, leading Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi, for example, to relinquish his WMDs. It let Iraqis find out how much better their lives could be under democratic self-government. Like all wars, even wars of liberation, it took an awful toll. The status quo ante was worse.

Jeff Jacoby writes for the Boston Globe.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 5 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. History will document that President George W. Bush won the Iraqi war and President Barack Obama lost the peace. With all the money that the U.S. spent fighting the war to topple Saddam Hussein and restore Iraq and the region to normalcy, not counting the priceless American blood and treasure, there is not one structure, not one monument, not one sidewalk, not one public park, not one street light that the Iraqis can point to and say that was built by America. Don't blame that on President Bush. His successor cut and ran before it could be done.

    Carmine D

  2. You have not served your country in any way shape or form, either in war or peacetime. The opinions coming out of your mouth are like the wind coming from a lower part of your anatomy. Frequently made without thinking and knowledge.

    Carmine D

  3. In case you didn't already know El Lobo, my post here today at 10:08 a.m., while it can apply to a number of people and posters here, is specifically for you.

    Carmine D

  4. El Lobo:

    It's people like you that have given scientists pause. And now believe that they have grossly underestimated both the scope and scale of the animal kingdom intelligence.

    Carmine D

  5. Neither. Intelligence quotient comes naturally. Although my test scores have always improved with age.

    Carmine D