Steven Kurlander: False sacrifices: Debating the wrong question on Iraq
Recently on Memorial Day, Americans honored the sacrifices of those American soldiers who fought and died in the various wars and “conflicts” of our nation. This year, like last year, and the year before, we also honored the many soldiers who made sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. America has been at undeclared war since the Sept. 11 attacks, and as we continue to fight on, openly or surreptitiously, against Islamic “terrorism” around the globe. And this year, after learning about Iraqi troops losing the Anbar province to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), many Americans asked once again why we got involved in a war in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place. Or whether the blood of our soldiers spilled in those theaters of war have been callously expended and in vain. As ISIS marched into Mosul, where many Americans sacrificed their lives to liberate and safeguard the city, undeclared presidential candidate Jeb Bush was asked whether he would have committed troops like his brother did. While Jeb was perceived as not answering the question as well as he should have, and spent a week correcting himself, he properly framed what the Iraq talking point should be in 2015: “The focus should be ‘Knowing what we know now, Mr. President, should you have kept 10,000 troops in Iraq?’” Bush said. “ISIS didn’t exist when my brother was president. Al Qaeda in Iraq was wiped out when my brother was president. There were mistakes made in Iraq for sure, but the surge created a fragile but stable Iraq that the president could have built on and it would have not allowed ISIS [to grow].” Here’s the bottom line: Bush is right. We should have left American troops to stabilize and safeguard Iraq and defined our mission there in terms of decades, not in terms of months. The same is true of Afghanistan. Now, ISIS poses a major threat to our national security interests and the entire Middle East. “Every day that goes by, the cost of liberating Iraq or the cost of defeating this cancer is only going to increase,” he said. “So I think we have to do the force that’s proportionate or, frankly, the violence proportionate that’s necessary to push back ISIS,” said U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois on a State of the Nation appearance. . We also should be asking whether the United States should be more succinctly defining a new foreign policy to bring stability to the Mideast and other regions of the world and safeguard the security of our alleged allies in Europe and Asia. America needs to commit troops now back in Iraq, and plan to stay there for a long time. World public opinion and political correctness be damned. Our military needs to attack ISIS, both in Iraq and Syria, with unrestrained military might. In terms of being the world’s policeman, America needs to grow its balls back. It’s time to remind the world of our power and military might. In the face of the growing influence and military power of Communist China, fascist Islamic radicalism, and a new Russia embracing dangerous nationalism and dictatorship, Americans enamored with Bruce Jenner’s sex change also need to wake up to new, very dangerous threats to our nation’s existence. Iraq is the right place to start and to begin repairing our perception of weakness in the world. Obama and his advisers entrenched in a failing internationalist foreign and military policy have made a very poor judgment call pulling our troops out and declaring the war over. It was folly to expect a nation historically hampered by deep religious, tribal and sectarian violence and division to not only present a viable defense to radical ISIS, but as a nation, which takes decades, if not centuries to evolve as a democratic nation. American soldiers should not continue to spill their blood in Afghanistan and the rest of the world for bad, obtuse foreign policy and national security objectives that now exist under the Obama Doctrine. Instead, on future Memorial Days, their sacrifices should be celebrated and honored once again for a more defined, even noble, goal of safeguarding human rights and promoting good democratic and economic objectives for both Americans at home and those living under brutal regimes around the world. Steven Kurlander blogs at Kurly’s Kommentary (stevenkurlander.com) and writes for Context Florida and The Huffington Post and can be found on Twitter @Kurlykomments. He lives in Monticello, N.Y. Column courtesy of Context Florida.
Round-up of Sunday editorials from Alabama’s leading newspapers
Here’s a round-up of Sunday editorials from Alabama’s leading newspapers: The Anniston Star – H. Brandt Ayers: Fool me twice … To get elected in Alabama and elsewhere, you have to scare the voters with some manufactured Bogeyman from whom the clever candidate promises protection. That was the theme of a column centered on early Alabama history last week by colleague and professional historian Hardy Jackson. His essay merits a hearty Bravo and A-a-a-a-men! When the election is over and the Bogeyman has melted away and nothing special happens, the voters are left with that self-critical sinking feeling, “Darn, fooled me again; Shame on me.” The experience leads to cynicism about the whole process, In Alabama, where vivid monsters have been created out of thin air, blacks will rule. They’re gonna take our guns away. We’re drowning in immigrants. These fears usually are followed by a do-nothing or do-little government in Montgomery, which inspires a low-level helpless anger among voters. The political culture in this state could be called: “Angry Resignation; I’m mad as hell but I can’t or won’t do anything about it.” But this shadow play between candidates and voters is not exclusive to Alabama. It is as old as Rome and Machiavelli’s “The Prince,” the first handbook for crafty politicians. In America, the threat is persistently seen as coming from the left. From Social Security to Medicare, the opposition has cried in horror, “Creeping Socialism.” Communism and socialism have been chief Bogeymen of American politics, and neither could be more bogus. American culture is highly resistant to left-wing ideology. The Birmingham News – Marketing maternity: Are we valuing the message over the medicine? Imagine you’re a woman who just found out she is going to have a baby. You see a hospital advertisement for maternity care that includes words and phrases like “empowerment,” “personalized birthing plan” and “you decide.” Sounds good, doesn’t it? The advertisements present a menu of appealing services. Most pregnant mothers already want to have a say in the details of delivering their babies, so these advertisements play on that demand. But what happens when the care provided doesn’t match marketing expectations? It happened to a friend of mine, Caroline Malatesta, who is now in ongoing litigation with the hospital where she delivered her baby. She chose the hospital based on their advertised flexibility and customization, discussed her birth plan with her doctor, and arrived at the hospital assuming that the plan would be followed. During the delivery she was told to lie on her back. When she protested that doing so was not part of the plan, the nurse simply told her that her doctor wasn’t on call. A physical struggle ensued, forcing her to her back. The child was delivered healthy, but instead of a joyful experience, Caroline now suffers permanent injuries. While she didn’t have a specific birth plan, my wife delivered two of our sons at the same hospital and our experiences were positive. But that’s the point. The Decatur Daily – Legislators show their bullying ways Alabama legislators usually operate with a veneer of civility and expressions of concern for their state, but occasionally some reveal themselves as schoolyard bullies. So it is with their treatment of the state Board of Education. The latest of many clashes came last week, when the board declined to confirm appointees for the newly minted Public Charter School Commission. A 4-3 majority preferred not to be a rubber stamp in appointing nominees they had no role in selecting, for a charter-school law into which they had no input. They tugged on Superman’s cape. It was a courageous move they may come to regret. The first retaliation came from state Rep. Terri Collins, R-Decatur, with the enthusiastic support of Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard. Just back from a trip to D.C. to collect an award from an out-of-state charter school group honoring her for pushing a version of its legislation through the Statehouse, Collins had no patience with the impertinent education board. “If they don’t want to take advantage of the honor, we’ll go back to the appointee process,” she said, and immediately filed a bill that would entirely exclude them from selecting charter commission members. It was a sadly amusing legislative slap. In fact, both the board and the department it oversees have been isolated from meaningful input throughout the process of implementing a charter school system. Taxpayer money to support the charter schools — much of which will enrich private companies that the law authorizes to manage them — comes straight from the state’s public schools. The law gives local-elected school boards nominal control over charter schools, but allows the charters to instead report to the Public Charter School Commission if local boards don’t do what they want. The state Board of Education likewise has nominal authority over who serves on the charter commission. That authority is a sleight of hand meant for public consumption, however, as the board is limited to nominees selected by the same elected officials who pushed the charter legislation through. So Collins’ threat to eliminate the board’s authority over the charter commission is merely a threat to make blatant what previously was concealed. The Legislature resents its elected counterparts on the Board of Education, and has never had any intention of including them in the charter school conversation. Dothan Eagle – Gaming the budget In the midst of controversy over Alabama’s chronic financial problems, it’s wise to consider what the politicians have to say with a healthy dose of skepticism. However, it’s mind-boggling that the Ways and Means Committee of the Alabama House would respond to weeks of teeth-gnashing and wailing over the potential harm of a budget shortfall by approving a general fund bill without filling the gaps. From one perspective, it’s an unconscionable dereliction of duty. There are various options afoot that would go a long way toward increasing the state’s revenue. And there are surely expenditures that could be eliminated long before threatening to decimate public
