M. Porcius Cato's Blog

"Human Smoke, in other words, is not a conscientious pacifist tract. It is not a clever contribution to today's debate on warfare, and it does not add anything to what we know about World War II. It is a cheerful contribution to the movement against scholarship..."

 

Well said, Anne. We see this "movement against scholarship" in many places -- with speculation, unfounded opinion and pop psychology too often taking the place of genuine research.

 

But I have to say that, on the issue of the War in Iraq, I don't agree with Anne Applebaum's view (expressed elsewhere in a Washington Post piece) that a call for pulling the troops out of Iraq is some form of "hypocrisy" because she imagines that we'll all be clamoring to rush back again later should any ethnic cleansing start.

 

Maybe things will get worse in Iraq if we leave, or maybe things will just stay the same. Maybe even the Iraqis will be glad to see the back of us, I don't know. What I do know is this: After 5 years of this mess and the loss of more than 4,000 U.S. lives over there, I can't see the American people clamoring for any return to Iraq, should somebody new in the White House next year decide to bring the troops home.

 

-- Nephele

I haven't read any of this, but I'm wondering, have you guys have read the book yourselves? I assume it just hit the press?

After 5 years of this mess and the loss of more than 4,000 U.S. lives over there, I can't see the American people clamoring for any return to Iraq, should somebody new in the White House next year decide to bring the troops home.

 

You may be right about public opinion, but at least one of the implicit targets of Applebaum's claim (Barack Obama) has said that he wouldn't simply bring all the troops home and that he would be willing to send them back in if necessary. Given Obama's statement, I don't think Applebaum is fighting a straw man. It's arguably hypocritical of Obama to denounce McCain and Clinton for endorsing a limited presence in Iraq if Obama recognizes that some US presence is warranted.

 

Moreover, I do wonder whether pulling out of Iraq will keep us out for good. Certainly, we left Vietnam and never needed to return. The unsuccessful resolution of WWI, however, forced Americans back to Germany in less than 25 years, which I'll bet was the last thing anyone could imagine happening in 1918. My hope is that we can leave very soon--and for good, but I can easily imagine scenarios (e.g., an Iranian-backed Shiite government in Iraq supporting attacks on Israel or Saudi Arabia) that would land us right back where we started. We can pray that doesn't happen--or we can accept the Kurds' invitation to base some troops in the region to make sure it doesn't happen.

Moon, the book is new and I haven't read it, and haven't checked to see if we already have it in my library. I'll be at the Strand this afternoon and may pick up a review copy at half-price. I see from the Strand's website that they may also still have some advance, uncorrected proofs of the book.

 

MPC, what you say does make a lot of sense. But the manner in which our nation is conducting this war is wrong, wrong, wrong. I'm speaking on behalf of the service members who are being sent back for a second and third tour of duty, who shouldn't be going back at all. I know of one personally who shouldn't be there, and he's back there right now. We've got an unprecedented number of service members -- "about one in every five troops" -- having suffered a traumatic brain injury, let alone the numbers (which include the young man I know) who are suffering from untreated post-traumatic stress and being sent back to Iraq.

 

If you believe the findings of the RAND study (and the Pentagon officials themselves accept those findings), then (quoting from the news article I linked) "about an estimated 320,000 service members have suffered TBIs...The full societal cost of a mild case of brain trauma can reach $32,000 per year, including treatment expenses, the patient's lost productivity and the value of caregiving by family members, the Rand study said. The annual figure for a moderate-to-severe case ranges from $268,000 to more than $408,000."

 

Quoting directly from the RAND study: "Since October 2001, approximately 1.64 million U.S. troops have deployed as part of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF; Afghanistan) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF;Iraq)...Assuming that the prevalence found in this study is representative of the 1.64 million servicemembers who had been deployed for OEF/OIF as of October 2007, we estimate that approximately 300,000 individuals currently suffer from PTSD or major depression and that 320,000 individuals experienced a probable TBI during deployment. About one-third of those previously deployed have at least one of these three conditions, and about 5 percent report symptoms of all three."

 

Okay, so war is hell and that's the price one pays. Understood. But I'd like to know how these past five years of War in Iraq (with no apparent end in sight) have affected our volunteer reserves -- anybody have any recruitment statistics? What happens when we find ourselves having to defend our own nation?

 

-- Nephele

With family and friends in Iraq and with a Ron Paul sign in my window, I'm with you Nephele. Just to be clear: I'm not arguing on behalf of the war, only on the benefits of keeping a base in the region. A base would serve as a deterrent to the Iranians and thus as a safeguard against further deployments.

With family and friends in Iraq and with a Ron Paul sign in my window, I'm with you Nephele.

 

Yes, of course. Sorry, MPC. I do know your stand on this mess, and I was mostly venting over Anne Applebaum's stand -- or rather, her "non stand," as I don't remember her offering any solutions of her own, in that critical piece of hers I'd read elsewhere. I don't mean this as an entire criticism of her, because I do think she's a smart woman.

 

But, am I wrong in presuming that merely maintaining a base in the region would mean a reduction of troops in the region on the whole? If so, Anne Applebaum would seem to be opposed to this as well, as she has otherwise stated that this sort of withdrawal would not, in her opinion, be "effective."

 

-- Nephele