Quote:
Originally Posted by Haak
Yeah I know. It's just that the problem to me seems that America tries to do good things despite the blatant insincerity behind it, which inevitable turns those good things into rotten ones. Instead of saying that they shouldn't try to do those good things, I think we should say that if they're going to do them then they ought to do it with sincerity. But I guess that may not be in America's best interest since there's not really anything in it for them...
|
Despite the cynicism about America's reasons for going into Iraq, I suspect that a good many behind the decision sincerely did have good intentions behind it. The problem was a bit of self-centeredness. Few would deny that Saddam Hussein was doing terrible things, and that getting rid of him was something that probably saved many. But what next? Many of my fellow Americans seem to feel that our society and government models are the best, and that we're doing other countries a favor by going in, stomping their government, and then giving them the blueprints and initial setup for something that resembles our own.
I think that what America has works for America. I don't know that it's the best or most desirable model for everyone around the world. Even if it is, I'd rather that they choose it for themselves.
The long-term planning wasn't so hot because it seemed as if the government expected that things would go smoothly once the initial new government was set up. But the Iraqis are not the same as Americans, and the cultural background and historical experiences that they hold are quite different from our own. It remains to be seen how their society will hold together given the intracultural rifts that exist, now unbound by an external dictatorship.
Would it have been better in the long run if Saddam had been left in power, and if we had simply played a supporting role when the Iraqis eventually rose against him? We'll get a better sense of that as time goes on, but we'll never really know.