01 March 2008

Democratic Primary: Anything BUT Black & White

Tuesday will probably be the decisive primary for the Democratic Party and as that day approaches, I find myself increasingly concerned for where we are headed.

If you read my blog regularly, you know that I am undecided on how I will vote in the upcoming Presidential election. A political moderate, I find this Presidential race to be particularly agonizing.

While McCain may not be the "obvious favorite" of most conservatives, he may be their only choice in the end. I fear that if this is the case, we are definitely looking at a Democrat as our next President. And while there are many things I, personally, like about Obama, the big question regarding our involvement in the Middle East may be more crucial than we realize.

I understand that the American people are sick and tired of the war in Iraq.
I understand that most people (Democrats and Republicans alike) believe that we went into Iraq under questionable circumstances. An increasing number of Americans are starting to admit that there seems to have been "ulterior motives" at play and a definite lack in long-term planning.
But does that mean we should just surrender?

Consider the aftermath when we pulled out of Vietnam.
If you are not well-read on that period of our history, I invite you to do a little research. Google it.
And in Iraq?
In Iraq, there is so much more at stake -- invaluable territory, oil, resources, -- than mere ideology.

Whether we like it or not, our actions up till now WILL have a consequence.
This area of the Middle East is rich with oil and other precious resources and is more than ripe for political and religious revolution.
While some will argue, convincingly, that we have created nothing but a quagmire in the Middle East, others will point out that deserting that quagmire might be far more detrimental.

Let's just put it all out there:
If WE leave, someone else WILL take our place.


I'm NO proponent of increasing our occupation there or even for maintaining the status quo,
BUT
If we think that Iraq will simply go back to being an independent, Democratic nation with a self-sufficient economy, we are seriously deluding ourselves. In some ways, the damage is irreparable -- at least, in the short term.
And for us to think that by leaving we are somehow doing the Iraqi people a "humanitarian favor" is almost laughable.
We will pat ourselves on the back and congratulate each other on our "noble actions;" meanwhile, we will have just thrown this "liberated" region to the proverbial wolves.

I agree that we don't need to be the "world's police," but don't we have an obligation to take care of the mess we made? If we don't, someone else will.

There are other countries out there who want that oil.
There are other nations who want that land.
There are other ideological and religious zealots who would love to step in and take power over the fragile morale of the Iraqi people.
If you think that us leaving IS the solution, you need to go back and study your history.
IRAN
TURKEY
CHINA
RUSSIA

and possibly more are sitting, waiting for us to leave and to leave the Iraqi people vulnerable.
They apparently know our history better than we do.

1 comment:

rwbowie42 said...

I agree with you that we must finish what we started (however misguided our original intrusion may have been). If it were not for his stance on the war, I would probably vote for Ron Paul. He is a strict constitutionalist (which is what we need).

I cannot bring myself to vote for Obama. His voting record is even more liberal than Hillary's. I'm afraid if he gets elected, we will become an "Obama-nation" to the Lord.

Just my humble opinion.