EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- The Sick Madness of Tom Friedman's Culture
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Modest Proposal
There is a great moral conundrum in the Iraq situation.
The pro-war position that we cannot abandon the mess we've made does have great certain moral authority. There are now millions upon millions of Iraqis whose lives have been ruined in this war and millions upon millions more whose lives continue to be at risk due to the chaos that was unleashed by the war and during the time that America has been in charge of the country. To abandon them and fail to establish a secure and decent level of civilization is reprehensible.
But there are two problems.
The first is that nobody who supports the war and continuing America's presence in that war has proposed what is required to achieve our moral responsibility.
According to both the Army's old and new counter-insurgency manuals, it takes 40 troops per 1,000 members of the civilian population. Iraq has 26 million people. That means 670,000 troops. Not just for three months, or six months, or a year. Insurgencies and civil wars go on for a long, long time. Five years if we're very lucky. Ten years is reasonable.
If we are going to live up to our moral commitment, the moral commitment that the political right continues to point up in any discussion of the war, we need to triple the size of our military. That means a draft.
The second problem is that I have two horses in that race. A daughter and a son. I will fight tooth and nail and move to Canada, before I let them become cannon fodder in a war that has been morally outrageous and ethically repugnant from the beginning. Nor would I suggest that anyone else's daughter's and son's be drafted and give up three years of their lives, at a minimum, and perhaps their limbs, their minds, or their very lives, to make up for this madness, stupidity and ineptitude.
However, there are a lot of people who supported the war. Lots and lots of them.
They should go. George Bush likes wearing uniforms. Let him march in Baghdad. We might say that Dick Cheney is old and feeble, but he can certainly do secret administrative duties from an undisclosed location in Iraq. John McCain can run the POW camps. Hillary Clinton, who voted for the war, can serve, as an example to women. John Kerry, who promised to fight the same war better and smarter, and who voted for it, can serve. I would pay good money to see Bill Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz in uniform. Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity would make great MPs, or failing that, do great at KP, or digging latrines.
How hard can it be to find a couple of million pro-war folks?
Notice, please, that I have not recommended drafting the children of pro-war people. Their lives are their own. The Bush twins, the Cheney girls, should not have the sins of their fathers (and/or mothers) visited upon them. Except, insofar as they themselves are, or were, pro-war.
If we are to speak of a moral obligation, let those who speak of it, or support those who speak of it, live up to it. They should no more visit their moral obligations on us than we should visit their sins upon their children.
Draft the war supporters. Send them to Iraq. Let them put Humpty-Dumpty back together again. They deserve it. We deserve it. The good people of Iraq deserve it.
Larry Beinhart is the author of Wag the Dog, The Librarian, and Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin. All available at nationbooks.org
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
29 Comments so far
Show AllIn talking about the "moral authority" of the pro-war position, the author here misses the point. Supporters of withdrawing the troops are not in favor of leaving the mess the US made in Iraq for Iraqis to deal with. It is clear that US troops the major cause of the violence. Removing the troops will significantly decrease the amount of violence and remove the cover for people who are killing innocent Iraqis while using resistance to an illegal occupying force as an excuse. Once the troops are gone, the US can undertake policies that will actually contribute to ending the violence, including funding reconstruction projects, ensuring the US does not have control over Iraqi resources, and supporting regional diplomacy.
Everyone must serve.
As Prince Harry prepares for deployment to Iraq, the Bush Twins are re-upping for another summer tour of Kennebunkport Bay Watch.
It is always easy to support the war if you don't have to sacrifice anything for it. I have said this for a long time to my prowar acquaintances when they accuse me of being unpatriotic or even pro-terrorist. I don't know if it gets through to them, but they stop talking about it. They even get a bit anti-war when I mention that the war costs so much and that it may have to cause taxes to rise.
I've been saying it for a long time.
The discussions with the supporters can be very brief - you support the war, fine, enlist.
Nice, nice, nice, polite conversations with the supporters are idiotic. The time can be much better spent.
Of course there is the obvious point that Bush, Cheney, et al. use the argument that "we cannot leave them like this" not because they want to repair the damage to Iraq but because they will use any excuse they can find to justify staying longer to try to secure the oil for their friends in the US oil industry. It is like an armed robber staying to empty the pockets of those he shot and claiming he is just sticking around because he does not feel comfortable abandoning those who are bleeding because of him.
What do vultures have to do with Bush and Cheney? They are nothing alike. It is an insult to vultures or any other animal form.
If anything feel sorry for any vulture that would have to feed on such poisonous flesh as theirs.
AH-h-h-h-h MoonRaven . . . You say it so well . . . "We are indeed all animals . . . When you accept that you begin to understand WHY. Very simple the strongest always prey on the weakest. Right now we are the T-REX and we are eating anything and everything in sight. We need the oil . . . lets go TAKE the oil . . .
"What do vultures have to do with Bush and Cheney? They are nothing alike. It is an insult to vultures or any other animal form."
:)
I am just happy with my favorite venting:
bastards, crooks, thieves and murderers.
It helps.
Regarding a draft into military service, of which I was a victim in 1969, I would like to quote the thirteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution:
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
--From Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
If BushCo wants to fight, let them go to Iraq. Don't be cowards and fool, force or bribe others to do their fighting for them. Military service should remain voluntary but only if each of us is able to decide where our taxes will go. If our taxes are going toward war, let those who want war pay for them. No one should be forced to fund a war, religious organizations, or the military/industrial complex.
Manipulative talk about bi-partisanship and about how divided we are ignores that nature is diverse, and uniformity is unnatural. Some groups want to change our towns, states, nation, country or the world to reflect their point of view by force or coercion. The fundies are moving to South Carolina and the Libertarians to New Hampshire. But the Internet community routinely finds and meets up with kindred spirits everywhere. Some day we will decide things direct democratically, like what our individual taxes will pay for or not, or who wants to fight in some war or not.
I have always agreed with the concept that the members of Congress' children should be in the first wave wherever we send troops. It would stop most wars.
By the eay, there is no such thing as KP now. Those chores have been outsourced to contractors like KBR.
It helps WHAT?
To survive in this madhouse.
For the citizen, there is only one way to support the war about which you have meaningful choice: you sign up to fight it. In that sense, almost no Americans now support the war, not even the macho-warrior-posers. Certainly the politicians and talking heads on TV are dead against it.
Citizens also support the war by paying taxes, but there they have no choice, except not to pay them and go to jail. Most Americans are supporting the war this way, whether they like it or not.
In fact, the belief that sets Americans apart from every other people on Earth is this: an American (a real one) believes that you can have a global empire, without sacrifice of life or limb, if you just spend enough money. These 'real Americans' actually expect to be able to wage war without casualties!
Oh, and yeah, if there were justice in the world, the war in Iraq would be fought by the politicians and pundits, rather than by empty-headed twenty-somethings, you bet.
But then, if there were justice in the world, it would be America in ruins with car-bombs going off, rather than Iraq.
RichM said it all.
Indeed; RichM nails it, except perhaps for mentioning the necessary diplomatic initiatives and reconstruction that Becca240 outlines.
I think the solution he avoided is correct - make the pro-war hawks serve, but not their children. Let the children learn from their parents fate.
Pull the Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law off the table and Bush and Cheney will quickly loose interest. If there was ever a smoking gun for the war this is it. It takes 75% of Iraq's oil and puts it in foreign oil companies hands. It was written by Bearing Point an American Company before Iraq even had a Parliment. It's the benchmark that Congress keeps pushing but doesn't know what it says. (except Kucinich)
Boycott gasoline May 15.
I am with Bill Richardson on this. All troops out by the end of 2007. Check his website and his position on Iraq.
How could it be a tragedy for those left behind if they know a loved one is with god?
I have another suggestion. We need a massive military force, or para-military group to enforce peace for the long-term. Blackwater has been the tool of Bush corporate stooges but why not put them to work ensuring peace? That takes money, lots of it. Suits against the military are historically hopeless, but what about the likes of Halliburton, et al.? A massive suit should be lodged against them in the name of the Iraqi people to supply the needed security for a decade of rebuilding and pacification. THAT's how you get things done with capitalism.
To moonraven,
That comment I made about god should not have appeared here. It was a tongue in cheek responseto the article about god and Virginia Tech.
You no likie my idea to sue Halliburton? It's as practical a suggestion as sending Cheney to Iraq on a warfarin drip.