Iraq: Unfinished Business

For eight years, the spilling of blood in Iraq was deemed "necessary" for multitudinous reasons. At first, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction posed a threat to our liberty. After striking a sense of fear among the American people, the invasion began. Guess what? It turns out there were no WMD. What a bummer. On May 1, 2005, the "Downing Street Memo" was published in The Sunday Times. It contained an overview of a secret July 23, 2002, meeting among British Government, Ministry of Defense, and British intelligence figures who discussed the build-up to the Iraq war—including direct references to classified U.S. policy of the time. The memo stated, "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."[1] 

After the WMD allegations against Iraq were proven to be a farce, the Bush Administration sought new justification for the war: biological weapons. Then US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, presented evidence to the United Nations Security Council that Iraq had active biological weapons that Saddam had allegedly planted among Sunni tribesmen. That allegation was also proven to be false. 

Running out of options, the Bush Administration turned to Plan C: the United States wants to plant the seed of democracy in Iraq, now war-torn and barren. Americans happily accepted that statement, not knowing that the Iraqis would never get their promised liberty. Eight years after the war had begun, American troops are beginning to withdraw, leaving the Iraqi people with neither WMDs or democracy. 24,418 lives lost, for nothing. 

While US troops began pulling out, Iraqis were asked (by American journalists) three questions: [adapted from the New York Times]

1. Will Iraq be better or worse off after American troops leave? 
2. What did the Americans achieve in Iraq? 
3. And what have they personally lost or gained since the 2003 invasion?

Samir Nasrat, 28, said, "The US didn't achieve anything. What did they achieve? It's all war and war. And then the sectarianism started. Before, we didn't know what Sunni and Shia meant. Sectarianism started when the Americans were here, and the arrests, and we saw things we hadn't seen before. Of course things were better under Saddam. There were sanctions imposed on us, but we didn't feel them. We had full ration cards. We weren't thinking about fuel and gas. We didn't think about electricity. Many things were available, security. There was order, and laws. And if you followed them no one would trouble you. Not anymore. I lost my uncle in the sectarianism. And I know a lot of families who were destroyed, and displaced from the country. They left for other countries because of the occupation."

Muhammad Jumad, 42, said this about the American withdrawal: 
1. It depends on how ready the Iraqi security forces are. I think they are ready, and I think it is better for the Americans to withdraw.
2. I didn’t see any achievements. They created more unemployment. As you see, I have a stand selling kebabs. Before the war I had a proper shop in Fadel, but we were forced out in 2006 because of all the sectarian events with the Sunnis there. We had to move to Sadr City and I have this stand, on a sidewalk.
3. I gained nothing. I am trying to think of something, but we didn’t gain anything.

Jassem Ahmed, 25, said, "It is a pleasant surprise for us that the Americans are leaving. God willing, things will be better because the Americans are the only excuse that the terrorist groups, Al Qaeda and the others, have to continue. They are behind all the sectarian conflicts."

Ali Jassem, 32, answered, "They didn’t achieve anything, or let’s say they achieved bombing, killing and explosions. They delivered false promises. They didn’t bring anything good for us, for the people; they only brought politicians who are out for themselves."

Is it too soon to leave? Or should we have never been there in the first place?