Enrique Gili is a freelance writer covering Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (There are two Iraqs in evidence these days: not just the one where weddings are bombed and young women murdered in reply. The other Iraq is harder to dramatise but it is equally real. It is a place where boring, ordinary things take place.
Driven by a presidential election cycle, six years of building animosity in US politics has finally been focused on the lightning rod that is Iraq. After four years of war, perhaps more than 650,000 Iraqi dead, it has finally come to a single question : Is Iraq worth saving ? ( Guardian Unlimited)
Email this entry to a friend
View the Technorati Link Cosmos for this entry
Comments
I think the question you pose has to be answered "yes" but if by "fighting for" you mean "continuing the US War in Iraq," then the answer is "no."
I just got back from a trip to Lithuania, and after seeing firsthand what that country has gone through under Nazi and Soviet occupation, I have much more empathy for the people of Afghanistan and Iraq. What we really need to do is leave them the fuck alone, and -- perhaps -- offer some financial and educational help as they rebuild their own nation.
It doesn't matter who you are, pushing smaller countries around only leads to fear and resentment, and an increase of resistance based on national identity. In other words, no matter how benevolent you think you are, when you are occupying another country, you are causing resistance to build and, if not outwardly expressed at the time, to fester until it will eventually explode in your face. I feel for the Iraqi people, but I don't think there's any chance in hell that an extended occupation will have one iota of positive impact.
Posted by: writerdd | July 23, 2007 12:40 PM
Surely the question to be asked is not "Is Iraq still worth fighting for?" but, rather, "Are we still capable of gaining Iraq by fighting?" with a rather heavy emphasis on the "we".
Posted by: The Ridger | July 23, 2007 12:58 PM