countezero: "We're still [in Iraq] because we are nation-building and want to leave a stable, functioning democracy. This, too, is obvious...
No, it isn't obvious at all. It isn't obvious in the least to Iraqis. It isn't obvious to a growing number of Americans, either. GW Bush himself repudiated nation-building during his initial campaign. It's what separates the situation in Iraq from Buffalo Roam's strained comparisons with World War 2. Obviously, W the candidate was somewhat informed at the time regarding the unpopularity of previous nation-building quagmires, and he and his handlers saw that the point resonated when Bush the candidate foreswore nation-building. Then they chose to forget. But Americans still remain uninspired about sending our troops out into the world to topple and erect foreign goverments, and that resolve is strengthening, because we have in fact learned from our own history, and that of empires past. A more honest slogan describing present policy in historical context would be "We Don't Know What the Fuck To Do Now".
That's why the American public never signed on to nation-building in Iraq, after the official scare-tactics about Iraq fell flat. Which is why the Congress never signed on to nation-building in Iraq. Unfounded as it was, "Saddam is Gonna Gitcha" had a lot more traction. The nation-building slogan projects the cart so many miles before the horse that there's no hope of hitching them up for an effective campaign. The nation-building slogan is only a withered fig-leaf.
The United States cannot ever broker a stable, functioning democracy in Iraq. A civil war is underway, in which the USA utterly lacks reliable allies among any of the factions. The Shi'a, wielding the most power of any faction in Baghdad, are aligned with Iran in ways that the USA can never compete with, and certainly not by antagonizing Iran.
The United States cannot ever broker a stable, functioning democracy in Iraq, because the ethnic cleansing that has occured under American auspices has not contributed to the reconciliation or reconstruction of a multi-ethnic Iraq; the opposite has been occuring. While ethnic segregation and tensions intensify, democracy is an entirely moot point. Stability and democracy are not feasible under American auspices, because American auspices have been the kiss of death to Iraq- first for the nation as a whole, and then for any factions, and for individuals perceived to be American stooges.
The United States cannot broker a stable, functioning democracy in Iraq because we will long be remembered as Iraq's tormenter and bane.
Criminally irresponsible intervention did not only destroy Iraqi national cohesion. Deep resentments resulting from the predictable but mismanaged collapse obviated any American-sponsored solution. To expect a reversal of this situation is to expect an unprecedented change in human nature in a departure from common sense, and the preponderance of all political and behavioral sciences. People don't invite the bull to fix a trashed china-shop. Long before the place gets fixed up again, the bull must go out the door, either on its feet or not.
Inventing and parrotting further slogans in an attempt to disguise the catastrophe can never mask the persistent reality that American legitimacy in overseeing Iraq is over. So is the legitimacy of any political structure propped up by an American-branded occupation, cursed from the outset. Highlighting potemkin villages, and announcing idealistic visions will not conceal this harsh reality.
To support the prolonging of American occupation is to participate in a criminal and murderous negligence that mocks the ideals of humanitarianism and democracy, only to conceal dysfunctional and deadly pride, arrogance, and dishonesty. The USA is not building democracy in Iraq. We're only building up hatreds, in order to avoid facing for a little while longer the growing horrors that our hubris has precipitated, and can never repair.
