President Bush is about to announce a policy change in Iraq this week. Speculation is that he wants to add up to 20,000 troops and 1 billion dollars for a jobs work program. Is this the right thing to do? I don't know, but after reading this article in the New York Times today I tried to step back and think about this as objectively (I was against invading) as I could.
Johan Spanner for The New York Times
Before the war Iraq was in dire straits.
* They had a poor infrastructure
* Saddam was in power
* Society for the most part cut along sectarian lines.
Now after the invasion:
* Iraq's infrastructure was all but destroyed
* Saddam has been replaced by a new government.
* Iraq is essentially in all out civil war
* 3000 civilians are being killed each month
* Over 3000 courageous American soldiers' dead
We as a nation are directly responsible this.
The big question is what do we do now? Yes we would all like the Iraqi government and the military to stand up and defend their country, but we must also take into account the dire straits their country is in and how difficult it must be for them. We cannot invade a country, destroy its infrastructure, ignite a civil war and then leave. I believe we have a moral responsibility to the tens if not hundreds of thousand Iraqis that have died and the thousands of American soldiers killed and injured to do the right thing.
I believe the right thing to do is to stay committed to Iraq. I don't think most of us have the enough information to give an informed opinion as to whether adding troops is the right thing to do, but it seems to me that withdrawing troops will only lead to further destabilizing Iraq.