Submitted to Ashland Daily Press, January 10, 2012

Is President Obama repeating President H. W. Bush's bad decision in Iraq following Dessert Storm?

The Bush administration failed to affect regime change by deciding not to occupy Baghdad following the defeat of the Iraqi army. That decision was allegedly made on the assumption that the Iraqi people would oust the defeated Saddam Hussein - an assumption apparently driven as much by domestic and international politics as it was by the realities in Iraq at the time. Hindsight proved it to be a mistake because it resulted in the resurgence of the Hussein government and the subsequent slaughter or displacement of thousands of Shiite Iraqis we had encouraged to revolt - not to mention the costly war just declared won by President Obama.

Politically expedient declarations of victory based upon politcally expedient assumptions have a way of coming back to haunt the administration which made them. The truth sooner or later is always revealed. It is revealed sooner when the national media is opposed to the administration making the declaration. It was immediate when President George W. Bush made the "Mission Accomplished" claim halfway through the Iraq war. Hardly a day passed before he was being vilified for that gaff.

Now President Obama has claimed victory in Iraq. He also claimed we can safely leave that country because its new democratic government is stable enough to hold the country together and strong enough to become an ally of the domestic world. Even more problematic, he intimated it was strong enough to resist domination by neighboring Iran. Despite the fact that a great many people of experience who know the area well have questioned the accuracy of his claims, the main stream media seems to have obediently accepted them.

Obama's claims were barely out of his mouth when a new Shiite-Sunni conflict exploded in the heart of Iraq, precipitated at least in part by the Shiite dominated Malaki Government seeking to purge duly elected Sunni officials. That at best has been under-reported by the press which also has cast a blind eye on a new wave of persecution of Iraqi Christians - nor has it mentioned the internal struggle for control of Iraq's oil resources. Clearly the Iraqi situation began deteriorating just as American troops were being withdrawn. That information is available. It is there on blogs and on some cable networks.

Can it be that the mainstream media is withholding the news because it would undermine support for Obama? These events may now be hidden from the American voter who has been gulled into believing our mission has been accomplished in Iraq and all is right and well there. But is it really? And what will we do when the President's happy declarations prove to be false?

If the worst happens in Iraq before November, we will certainly have our own regime change - if after - oh, well, in that case we can leave the problem to future administrations. Whatever happened to integrity in politics? While the Republicans seek another Ronald Reagan, the Democrats ought to be searching for another Harry Truman - both Presidents who put the country above self.

Francis Graves
Bayfield, WI