Thursday, February 01, 2007

Okay, Now, Why Are We There?

I wasn't going to blog about the War in Iraq, but . . .I read an interesting statement yesterday that was made by al-Maliki, the present leader of Iraq. He made the most interesting comment to CNN. He wanted to make it clear to America and Iran that they were not to fight their fight in Iraq. Here's one of the quotes. "Iraq has nothing to do with the American-Iranian struggle, and we will not let Iran play a role against the American Army and we will not allow America to play a role against the Iranian army, and everyone should respect the sovereignty of Iraq," al-Maliki said.
So, now Mr. al-Maliki has made it very clear. Iraq is a sovereign nation that is willing to tell Iran and America what is and is not allowed in Iraq. I say, great, let's get out of there and let him handle it. He's got his "court system," he's got his sovereignty, let him have his country. We've already done him the favor of taking it away from someone else and handing it to him. As I'm sure they know in Iraq, this war has simply become and remains a partisan issue in America. I, as well as most Americans have other questions and concerns, and now that we are telling Iran where they better get off, I have more questions. When America went to war with Iraq, was it really war with the country, or were we in fact, just after Saddam Hussein? Because we know there were no terror cells with any power there before we overthrew Saddam. We went over there looking for WMD, that weren't there either, so why did we go? Our President has stated, with the fall of the regime, we had to prevent terrorists from moving into Iraq, so the "terrorists issue" in Iraq, is after the fact. But back to my question. If we declared war on Iraq, then this leader is getting pretty pushy under occupation, because the war isn't over. And if the war isn't over and Iraq isn't under occupation, we are simply guarding and financing something, and I'd like to know what it is. If al-Maliki and America are on the same side, then why did he address America in the same manner as he did Iran? If he isn't afraid of the Iranian influx, then why are we there trying to protect someone that isn't worried about it? If we really only declared war to get Saddam, that's not exactly war, and that raises all new questions. If Iraq is now feeling strong enough to tell us how it should be, then why are we sending more troops into this civil war that doesn't seem to concern the leader? If America can have a sizeable troop force in Afghanistan and Iraq and now we can offer air assistance to Somalia and tell Iran "what for," but in July we didn't have the manpower to assist Israel, it's well beyond confusing, by now. And I read, now, our leader is considering some sort of funding for Fatah against Hamas. Surely all this can't just be over the oil . . . surely not! So, what are we doing? Does anybody know?
He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but . . .

No comments:

Blog Archive