To Fight or Retreat: A Debate on U.S. Policy in Iraq and the War on Terror
To Fight or Retreat: A Debate on U.S. Policy in Iraq and the War on Terror
This week, the U.S. House of Representatives will hold a debate on the war in Iraq and how best to combat terrorism in a post-9/11 world. Our response to international terrorism highlights the major differences between Republicans and Democrats, and the American public deserves to hear how their elected representatives want to proceed. Will we fight or will we retreat?
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and other Capitol Hill Democrats often refer to Iraq as a distraction. Pelosi has called Operation Iraqi Freedom a "war of choice" that isn't a part of "the real war on terror." Somebody should tell al Qaeda.
Ayman al Zawahiri, al Qaeda's No. 2 leader, knows how important the future of Iraq is to his cause. In a 6,000-word letter to al Qaeda's commander in Iraq - the recently eliminated Abu Musab al Zarqawi - Zawahiri made it clear the terrorists view Iraq as the central battlefield in the Global War on Terror.
For some reason, this clear acknowledgment by our nemesis of Iraq's importance hasn't registered with many domestic opponents of the war who insist on conceding defeat and withdrawing.
Operation Iraqi Freedom was hardly a "war of choice." Saddam was already a menace and a threat to international order when he ordered several divisions of the Iraqi Army into Kuwait in 1990. He routinely supported and openly encouraged acts of terrorism. He relentlessly persecuted and tortured his own civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, and others. He engaged in a multi-billion dollar scandal involving a number of our allies aimed at thwarting sanctions put in place after the Gulf War and abusing the "Oil-for-Food" program, thus causing even greater harm to his own people. And he refused to disclose and foreswear his maniacal pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.
In a way, Saddam made the case for his ouster better than anyone else. As President Bush said on the eve of the American-led invasion, we would meet the threat BEFORE it became imminent, "so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of fire fighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities."
September 11th made it clear that we could no longer afford to ignore madmen who threaten peace and stability. And due to the combination of modern technology and a murderous ideology, we can no longer rely on vast oceans and military supremacy only.
While there is no evidence that al Qaeda collaborated with Iraq on the September 11th attacks, there is no question that Saddam Hussein was an avid cheerleader of terror attacks against America and the West. Regarding al Qaeda and Saddam, Lee Hamilton (vice-chairman of the 9/11 Commission and widely respected former Democratic Congressman from Indiana) told MSNBC's Chris Matthews: "There are all kinds of ties There are all kinds of connections." Sitting back and waiting for bad things to happen is simply not an option.
Pelosi calls the war in Iraq a "failed effort." This is curious given the constant drumbeat of progress since the toppling of the Hussein regime. The Iraqis have held successful elections, drafted and ratified a national constitution, and have put together the first sovereign, free, and unified government in Iraq's history.
Yes, there have been setbacks. No war is easy and an honest account of our effort would acknowledge the staying power of the insurgency and the support it has received from foreign forces.
But the effort and savagery of the insurgents and their sponsors only underscores our progress and the importance of this effort in the Global War on Terror. Terrorism is as much a psychological campaign as it is a military one, and as long as our enemies see Iraq as the main battlefield, we must be willing to meet the challenge.
Defeating repressive, radical Islamists and their allies is our defining task in the early years of the 21st Century. Crushing their deadly and poisonous ideology, and freeing from tyranny the millions threatened with its bondage, is an effort for which the United States and her allies are uniquely suited. We are the primary target of radical Islamists' hatred and the leader of nations with the capability and fortitude to wage a prolonged fight. In my view, we must not shy away -- if but so our children and their children may live in peace.
This week's debate will give us all an opportunity to answer a fundamental question: are we going to confront the threat of terrorism and defeat it, or will we relent and retreat in the hopes that it just goes away?
http://johnboehner.house.gov/News.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=1172