Five years into a tormenting conflict in Iraq, which has led to great loss of life and properties for the United States, there are still sharp divisions among Americans on how to end the war.
While the conflict looks likely to drag on for the years to come, the debate about its final way out will also remain undecided for some time.
WINNING UNLIKELY
Even President George W. Bush, the war's staunchest defender, conceded on that Wednesday.
"Five years into this battle, there is an understandable debate over whether the war was worth fighting, whether the fight is worth winning, and whether we can win it," Bush said in his speech that marks the war's fifth anniversary at the Pentagon.
"The answers are clear to me: removing Saddam Hussein from power was the right decision, and this is a fight America can and must win," he noted.
The presumptive Republican presidential nominee, John McCain from Arizona, seemed to agree.
He has said he would stay the course and win the war if elected president, even if it will take 100 years or more.
But the majority of the Americans are unconvinced.
War, as late Prussian military guru Carl von Clausewitz wrote, is politics by other means. In other words, a war is not won until its political and strategic objectives have been secured.
Fred Kaplan, a well-known U.S. journalist, said at the onset of the war, Bush's aides seemed to have no idea on how to fulfill these objectives and thus don't have a winning strategy.
The rationale on surface for launching the war is to get rid of terrorists. Fundamentally, it has two grander goals, to export so-called U.S. democracy and to make strategic gains in the MiddleEast.
However, the outcome seems to run into the opposite end.
In terms of terrorist threats, the war didn't make the United States safer, since Iraq has turned into a breeding ground for terrorists after the invasion.
The U.S. intelligence community acknowledged in an assessment last July that the terror threat facing the country is growing and al Qaida is recovering.
Politically, the new Iraqi government is still unable to perform the basic functions for its people -- secure the nation. And democracy is even a luxurious dream.
The biggest irony is the war didn't yield many strategic benefits for the United States.
On the contrary, it strengthened its chief adversary in the Mideast, Iran, which is more influential than ever in Iraq after the collapse of the Saddam regime.
A PRICE TOO HIGH
The only achieved objective of the war so far is the removal of Saddam, but some contend the price is just too high.
John Burns, a veteran reporter of the war, wrote in the New York Times, "at the fifth anniversary, the conflict's staggering burden is a rebuke to any who hoped Saddam's removal might be accomplished at acceptable price."
Just as he said, the price of the war is beyond the expectation of most Americans.
It is hard to believe that in the war's sixth year, the U.S. troop level in Iraq is higher than that at the war's onset.
About 4,000 U.S. soldiers have been killed and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died in persistent bombings and attacks that damaged infrastructure and tore apart communities in Iraq. A million or more Iraqis fled homes to neighboring countries.
The financial cost of the war, by some recent estimates, will rise above 650 billion U.S. dollars this year and is on its way to perhaps 2 trillion dollars if the war drags on for another five years.
Moreover, the United States sees declining hard and soft powers.
The military, a pillar of U.S. power, has been overstretched by the war. A poll of 3,400 U.S. military officers by Foreign Policy magazine found that 88 percent agreed with the statement that the war in Iraq "has stretched the U.S. military dangerously thin."
In terms of soft power, surveys find U.S. popularity and respect slipping in most parts of the world as a result of the unpopular war.
Bush also paid huge political prices. The Republicans lost the 2006 midterm elections and his approval rating is hovering around 30 percent.
NO CONSENSUS FOR CONCLUSION
The war's heavy toll led to broad reckoning, including the Bush administration.
But there's no broad consensus on how to find a way out in Iraq.
Bush and his supporters as well as the military argued the troop "surge" in Iraq has worked and they will stay the course until a final victory. If there is any mistake in the war policy, that is the tactics used in early stage of the war.
Democrats called for a quick withdrawal but they just can't get enough votes on Capitol Hill to force Bush to withdraw the troops.
Leading Democratic presidential contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama promised to start the withdrawal shortly after taking office in the White House.
But they need more time to convince the U.S. public that their plans will work.
Some anti-war activists have deeper thoughts and said the war's biggest lesson is the "empire mentality" of U.S. politicians.
They say the United States should rely more on peaceful means to get the world's cooperation and respect and no preemptive and unilateral strikes like the war in Iraq.
However, it is a position that the world's sole superpower will find hard to take.
Source:Xinhua
|
Comment
Tell A Friend
Print Format
Save Article