....LMB: "Simplification"....

November 04, 2003

I spoke with KPFK reporter Jerry Quickley today. He was in New York, just returned to the country after spending about two weeks in Iraq, so I asked him a few questions about his time there (technically, I was "pre-interviewing" him for a radio show I produce for KPFK and Axis of Justice, the Axis of Justice Radio Network. No, I didn't choose the title). The fellow was literally in Iraq last week, so this was some pretty fresh data. For the most part, his answers were what we just keep hearing from the country, bad news on most fronts.

But there was one moment of clarity in our talk. Jerry said that he'd spoken with about 150 Iraqis during his trip, and two had been in favor of the U.S. occupation, and everyone else was against it. And the majority of these anti-occupation folks wanted the U.S. to leave as soon as possible.

Jerry also said that he'd talked to maybe 12-15 U.S. soldiers about their feelings regarding the occupation, and he said that every single one of them wanted to leave and go home.

The Iraqis want the Americans to leave Iraq, and the American soldiers themselves want to leave Iraq, so... what's the problem exactly?

Up until today, I'd been one of these folks who was bitterly opposed to the war, yet felt that since we were there, that the U.S. should fix the electric and water infrastructure, and provide security until Iraq got itself on its soon-to-be-democratic feet. Tthe fact that the Bush administration did not seem interested in any of this made my stance quite a confusing one; it's kind of like calling the cops about a burglary, having them shoot your dog, but hoping that now that they're there, that they'll stay and paint your living room.

But now, if Jerry is correct, it seems a significant number of Iraqis would rather risk the consequences of rebuilding their demolished country on their own, than continue to struggle under U.S. occupation. And if the occupation meant profits for Halliburton, withheld liberties, random shootings by terrified/crazed American soldiers, and still not having the electricity back on, what would they really have to lose by having the Americans leave?

I'll give it some more thought, but I am now much more significantly on the "leave" bandwagon than on the "stay" one.

[edit]

I usually let my commenters say whatever they like and don't respond, giving them the last word on the subject. Seems the fair thing to do. But I just got one that I think misunderstands part of what I wrote, so let me clarify.

The passage in question reads "a significant number of Iraqis would rather risk the consequences of rebuilding their demolished country on their own, than continue to struggle under U.S. occupation". The commenter interprets this to mean something like "those dumb Iraqis can't rebuild their country without the help of us smart Americans." This was not what I meant, although I see how one could read it that way.

To me, the bottom line is that Iraq is a nation that has been bombed and starved for over a decade, and is therefore very poor and many of the institutions and infrastructure that would be helpful/mandatory for rebuilding, have been destroyed. I'm not saying that the U.S. has more smarts that Iraq, but that the U.S. has more dollars than Iraq. It seems that the Iraqi people are willing to say "we think we have enough dollars and determination to rebuild our country without help from Uncle American Moneybags." And with all that I've heard about the terrible destruction and impoverishment of Iraq, that seems like a pretty gutsy decision. Granted, when your friends and neighbors are being shot by Uncle Moneybags' pals on a semi-regular basis, I imagine that makes the decision much easier.

So, to sum up, I was referring to Iraq's financial and logistical capacity, not implying that Iraqis were in some way inferior to Americans.

[/edit]