Stretch Play

Fire of Liberty

While we have a lot of people clamoring on about how our efforts in Iraq are failing and that we should get out of there as soon as possible, there is also a large part of America that sees the war in winnable but will just take some time. In fact, Harvard Law School Professor William J. Stuntz has an article over at the New Republic (Registration Required) that notes how the US should continue to keep pushing forward in our fight for democracy and freedom in Iraq rather than tucking our tails and booking out of the region that some folks in the US want us to do. Stuntz opens up his wonderful piece by noting that more often then not that when nations achieve quick and easy victories much like Hitler's blitzkrieg attack on Norway, Denmark and France in 1940(2 months) or Napoleon's conquest of Spain in 1808(2 months) they generally have never achieved lasting results but when you slough through a long and protracted war with a goal or a set of goals and fight for what's right, you will discover that you end up greater results. Stuntz points out that we only have to look at our own history and our experience during the Civil War to see how a long war can achieve greatness. The professor noted that even though massive quantities of blood and lives were spilt and lost to achieve victory during the Civil War, it was necessary to rip up all the roots and branches of ideas of succession and slavery once and for all to ensure that this great nation would never again become a "house divided." Well, Stuntz believes that the same principles of staying in the fight for the long haul that Lincoln promoted during the Civil War can apply to our fight in Iraq. I'd say we're approaching a "tipping point" towards achieving a sea change of freedom and democracy within Iraq if we continue to stick it out and fight the good fight. I think the good professor pretty much summed up our efforts in Iraq in the following paragraphs:

Today our forces and Iraqis are fighting together and, slowly, winning a good and noble war that holds the hope of bringing to millions a measure of freedom they never knew before. And yet today, America seems ready, even eager, to concede defeat and withdraw: a sad twist on the famous George Aiken formula for extricating American soldiers from Vietnam. It sounds bizarre--why would anyone want to throw away the chance of such a great victory, when victory seems within reach? But it isn't bizarre. On the contrary, it has happened before.

Again, consider the politics of the Civil War. In 1863 the Northern street--the term didn't exist then, but the concept did--rose, and New York saw the worst rioting in our nation's history. The rioters' cause was ending the draft on which Lincoln's war depended. A year later Lincoln seemed headed for electoral defeat, even as Grant's and Sherman's armies seemed headed for decisive military victories. Victory often seems most elusive to civilians when it is most nearly within soldiers' grasp. And noble causes often do not sound noble to the nation whose sons must fight for them. (Those who do the fighting understand: Lincoln had the overwhelming support of soldiers in the field, and I would bet my next paycheck that today's soldiers overwhelmingly support fighting through to victory in Iraq.) In many American towns and cities, then as now, the cause of freedom for others did not seem a cause worth fighting and dying for.

But it is, partly because--as Lincoln saw better than anyone--others' freedom helps to guarantee our own. A world where Southern planters ruled their slaves with the lash was a world where Northerners' rights could never be secure; if birth and privilege and caste reigned supreme in the South, those things would more easily reign elsewhere, closer to Northern homes. Lincoln had it right: Either democracy and freedom would go on to new heights or they might well "perish from the earth." So too today. A world full of Islamic autocrats is a world full of little bin Ladens eager to give their lives to kill Americans. A world full of Islamic democracies gives young Muslim men different outlets for their passions. That obviously means better lives for them. But it also means better and safer lives for us.

It'd be nice if Dean and company would read Stuntz's piece and realize that preaching defeat or calling for a early retreat from Iraq is the last thing we need to do. We've come too far and have devoted enough money and lives towards reaching this goal to just foolishly throw it away because a poll shows diminished support. In the long run people tend to favor principled leaders rather than the finger in the wind politicos. I guess that's why Lincoln is a role model to us all.