Published: January 10, 2007 10:25 am      

As with 'escalation' in Vietnam, 'surge' won't win in Iraq

While President Bush decides what to do in the debacle of Iraq, brave American men and women continue to die and suffer. The cost in blood and national self-confidence is not worth it. The American people are abandoning Mr. Bush's ill-conceived war, and an overwhelming majority does not trust their president.

Previous tactics and strategies have been exhausted ever since our initial failure to "shock and awe" an enemy that knows well this is a war without end. Winning every battle is irrelevant. They will never quit.

Engaged in an ideological and sacred religious crusade, the Iraqis will fight as long as it takes until the Americans leave. They have resisted foreign invaders in the past, and they will do it again. Sadly, President Bush helped create the seeds of nationalistic rebellion in the midst of a civil war.

And now, the president talks of a "surge," or what was called an "escalation" during the Vietnam civil war. If one of our major purposes in Iraq is to let the Iraqis take the lead in enforcing their own national security, then whose side are young Americans fighting and dying for?

This is another deadly distraction from a needed rational regional policy that will further demoralize U.S. troops and increasingly alienate the Iraqi people.

American men and women are asked to participate and die in a raging civil war between Sunni insurgents, Shiite militias, and Kurds. Whose side are we on? Our brave, patriotic, and noble troops are in the middle of another cycle of sectarian violence in which all three sides agree that young men and women should be killed. Only the Iraqis can bring order to Iraq.

So much for democracy and regime change. Is America better off? Instability, disloyalty, corruption, and lawlessness characterize Prime Minister al-Maliki's government, while ambivalence, indecision, and chaos describe U. S. policy.

Fundamental change is essential. We cannot win by simply escalating troop strength. The problems we face are political, not military. A new strategy of direct regional diplomacy is absolutely essential for resolving the Iraqi morass. Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and Israel must be brought into the discussion if we truly want to bring some degree of stability to the Middle East and the rest of the world.

Benchmarks and timetables mean nothing to Prime Minister al-Maliki, Parliament Speaker Mahmud al-Mashhadani, or powerful cleric Muqtadaal-Sadr. With democracy comes sovereignty, and the Iraqi duly elected power structure, not the U.S., will eventually reach some sort of conflict resolution and equilibrium - maybe. And, it will take years, not months.

Once again, an American president sends the best and brightest to fight in a war built upon lies, with an unclear mission, reckless strategy and no end in sight. There are limitations to high-tech military equipment and superbly trained warriors when facing an unconventional and highly motivated people who will fight and die for their national sovereignty, religious values, attitudes, and beliefs. As we learned in Vietnam, nationalism and nation building are powerful forces.

Like Vietnam, Iraq, regardless of what we do, will continue to have a profound and lasting impact on another generation of Americans. This misguided and deadly venture will leave our children alienated, confused, and cynical about American leadership in the world. When will we ever learn from previous entanglements?

There is no justification for American men and women to bleed and sacrifice for a civil war-torn and fragmented Iraq, whose leaders are more interested in their own parochial interests. Having served as a Marine in Vietnam, I must ask, how many more American lives will be lost before President Bush, like President Johnson, admits that he has made a deadly mistake? Is the world really a better and safer place as a result of President Bush's actions?

May God Bless our brave and selfless men and women serving in Iraq.

John N. Bambacus
Frostburg