Re: "Why Americans Oppose the Iraq War"

I am no political analyst nor do I have any unusual insights into the current situations in Iraq.  I am simply an ordinary Joe citizen observer.  However, I would like to strongly disagree with Mr.
Warshawsky's article about why we oppose the Iraq war.  His overarching premise is that President Bush changed his tactics with Iraq from toppling Saddam to making a democracy there.

From my perspective, President Bush has been quite consistent from the start of the Iraq war — topple Saddam Hussein and free the people of Iraq.  But how does one take a place like Iraq, who's civilization has been in ruins for over a decade, and make it free simply by toppling its tyrannical dictator?  Once Saddam Hussein is removed, do the people simply get back up the next day — dust off — an "be" a free nation so we can go onto other terroist regimes?

There is no question in my mind that Saddam had Iraq's infrastructure in shambles and its people living in fear daily.  That is what dictators do. Simply ousting Saddam and walking away would be like freeing the children of Israel, defeating the Egyptians, and having Moses say, "You're on your own now.  A free people.  See 'ya later." (to borrow from a Bible story.)  No one would expect slaves of many years to know "how" to "live free" — or maintain freedom — overnight.  They need to be taught, trained, and given a helping hand for a time.

Likewise, I expect that Iraq is going to need a lot of help through the transition from a fearful dictatorship to self governance and self protection.  Hindering this effort are a bunch of terrorists who do not want the Iraqis to have the self confidence to stand up to them.  (After all, a broken country without a dictator is prime real estate for a heavily armed, well funded extremest group to simply move in and take
over.)  In this light, one would expect some good people and soldiers are going to die fighting terroist pot shot attacks while at the same time trying to help Iraq "be" a free nation.

For whatever reason the mainstream American media are dead set against the efforts in Iraq and gleefully shout any perceived setbacks.  They dredge up whatever bad news they can portray.  But I have largely disregarded the mainstream media now.  (In my opinion, weathermen are now more accurate than well known media outlets.)

From what little I understand, military personnel are signing up for second and third tours of duty in Iraq.  I doubt they sign up for bloodthirsty reasons.  The opposite is more likely the case — experiencing the joy of training an opressed people to stand on their own two feet — the dream we live here in America.  I have a few friends who have returned from Iraq and share amazing — uplifting experiences. They are quite positive about it even though it isn't flawless.  They also think very dimly of our mainstream media.

The ability of the mainstream American media to shape opinions to match their own is a topic for another time.  In my mind, folks give too much credibility to the mainstream American media and polls are simply a metric used to gague the effectiveness of shaping opinions.  President Bush made it clear at the outset that we would need to help the Iraqi people get on their feet.  If the media wants to distort this message and try to shape opinion — fine.  But the message from our President has been consistent.  The mainstream media has not been.  And it is a sad state of affairs that so many still trust what the mainstream media peddles.

By the way, free people are the most effective weapon.  We built a military that defeated slavery, and other horrible opressive regimes in many, many other battles.  Are we perfect — no.  But we've got a pretty good track record.

Jonathan Jensen   9 15 06