Column for Feb. 8, 2007

Think about Iraq before drawing conclusions

Who hasn't heard all the chatter about President Bush's decision to put more troops in Iraq? If you have not heard it yet, I figure that you must live in a cave and your only news source is this small town newspaper you are currently reading. There are critics that support such an action, there are many who do not. The loudest voices, or at least those that get press coverage, seem to be those opposed to the so called "troop surge" deployment.

Here is the problem. The majority of those who are in opposition to the troop deployment are not ideologically opposed to warfare. They are merely opposed to anything that a conservative will do while in office, if you can actually categorize George W. Bush as a conservative. I personally have a hard time with that label for him, but he is still an improvement over the alternatives we could have had. Many of the same men and women in Congress who approved The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.

I personally opposed the war in Iraq on one primary basis. There was no declaration of war. If we are going to declare war, then let us follow Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution which vests this authority in Congress and nobody else. They do not have the authority to grant the use of military force against another nation, only to declare war upon it. Yet Congress did so anyway. Thus, our entire action in Iraq, not to mention Vietnam and Korea is illegitimate.

I take issue, however, with those who advocate our withdrawal from Iraq on that basis. The fact is that no matter how improper it is that we entered Iraq, we are indeed there and our leaving would throw Iraq into even more chaos. After victory over Japan, we set up military leaders to be governors. We need to do much the same in the Middle East.

There has been much pressure to allow Iraq to have a "democracy" and run their own show. How can you explain to someone who has never tasted pizza what pizza tastes like? Or someone who was born blind what the color orange looks like? It is no different in the Middle East and self governance. People who have never had the freedom to choose their own leaders don't yet comprehend the freedom, lifestyle, nor responsibility that accompanies that form of government. As long as I am on the topic, we all need to stop using the word democracy as a synonym for the word republic. The two are vastly different. We do not live in a democracy in this nation. The Pledge of Allegiance has it correct when it says, "and to the republic for which it stands", not "and to the democracy".

Last May, my wife and I got a dog that was abused and neglected. Some of you may have seen her story on television. She did not readily and fully adjust to the idea of freedom from abuse, plentiful food, or the ability to play and frolic. She apparently had been abused by a male at some time and was terrified of me. All the dogs that were rescued at the same time were the same way, we found out. It took time for her to realize that she had the freedom, love, and comforts available to her that she did. Likewise, it will take time for an entire culture to adjust. Furthermore, when a large part of the culture is ideologically and religiously opposed to such freedom, there will be great instability and strife. Make no mistake that the predominantly Islamic culture will not take to the idea of freedom of the masses readily. We have already experienced this, otherwise our troops would not be dying there.

The bottom line is that when forming your opinions on the topic, do so according to facts and logic, not according to emotion or what is politically expedient. I want to say more, but I have run out of room in this week's column.