Blog Assignment_6

 

1.  Vincent, Steven. “The Fall of Saddam Hussein’s Regime Has Given the Iraqis Freedom”. Iraq. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven P, 2004

 

This article is written by Seven Vincent, a freelance writer in New York.  He talks about his own experiences in Iraq when talking to regular civilians, giving descriptive stories of Saddam Hussein’s cruelty, such as the use of torture of criminals and mass graves, in contrast to the freedom and opportunity that US has provided.  Although he does not deny that there are still problems that need to be fixed – the political and economical structure particularly – it is nothing compared to the “life of constant terror” that Iraqis faced in the past (104).    

 

“The UN and human-rights groups have noted Saddam’s habit of ‘cleansing’ prisoners by killing their inmates.  The record is appalling: in 1984, 4,000 political prisoners killed at the Abu Ghraib jail, an 2,500 more between 1997 and 1999.”(101)

I thought it was interesting that prisoners in Abu Ghraib have been killed by Saddam, and now the US has, in the past, used the same jail to torture them.  I would also like to research UN’s side of this story to re-affirm this quote.  

 

“But in the catalogue of Saddam’s evil, perhaps the most gruesome entry concerned the use of torture.  Favored methods included the disfigurement and branding of criminals, such as chopping off fingers or tearing out tongues that had uttered anti-Saddam thoughts.  Other methods involved rape, electric shock, beating with an axe handle, the penetration of victims’ limbs and chests with a power drill, or the gradual lowering of bound captives into a bath of acid … A general who had earned Saddam’s displeasure was devoured by rabid dogs”  (101-102)

I felt that this quote was very powerful and stresses the amount of fear he had on the public.  As Vincent is a witness of the victims that have undergone such torture, I am led to believe that Saddam’s actions are true.  The kind of evidence that he mentions are the things I would think that I would see in a movie, not in actual life.  Although it makes me feel relieved that Saddam is no longer in power, I personally do not believe in the death penalty.  This quote also convinces me that the US is doing the right thing: replacing Saddam’s tyranny with democracy, where there will be free speech.  

     

2. Bacevich, Andrew J. “Redefining the War on Terror.” Council on Forein Relations. 5 Aug. 2008. 11 Aug. 2008 http://www.cfr.org/publication/16878/redefining_the_war_on_terror.html

 

This source is an interview that Greg Bruno did of Andrew J. Backvich, who is the Professor of International Relations and History in Boston University.  Since Professor Backvich has written a “highly critical” op-ed against Bush’s Administration for the Boston Globe, I generally felt that he was promoting his own ideals and view on the Iraq War during the course of the interview.  However, the fact that Backvich criticizes even that “fundamental questions” about our involvement in Iraq are not being answered by politicians leads me to look into his ideas.

 

“To me, one of the problems of the paradigm of global war is that it has not signified war in the metaphorical sense, like war on AIDS, war on drugs, and war on poverty. It has signified war in a literal sense that the employment of military power, on a large scale, in pursuit of very large ambitions—like the liberation or dominance or transformation of Iraq”

To me, I like this quote because it simplifies the “war on terror” to the changes the US are making in Iraq government.  I very much agree that our role in Iraq is to prevent future violence based on terror and a democratic, peaceful environment.  Also, Backvich also hints at the greater plan that US foreign policy may have in its “war against terror”, which the Bush Administration has not clearly defined.

“I’ve reviewed [Robert] Kagan’s new book [The Return of History and the End of Dreams] in the most recent issue [of Foreign Affairs] … The plan that they [Islamists] have, the concept for how people should live, is simply not responsive to what ordinary folk want for their lives. They are fighting against modernity, and as Robert Kagan says, that is a fight that they cannot win.

Almost everything on this struggle is on our side, and therefore we should approach it with the confidence and patience, and shouldn’t run pell-mell into these military adventures that the Bush administration has approached. … Our adversaries are murderers. We ought not to dignify their cause as if it were the equivalent of Marxism or Leninism or National Socialism or something of the last century, because they don’t deserve that type of status.”

I like how Backvich brings in someone else’s viewpoint, Robert Kagan. He uses his novel to lead to his own claim that the US should not reach down to the level of violence that terrorists use to correct their mistakes.  In turn, Bachvich proposes that political tactics be used.  Although more time would be required for such a step, we have nothing to lose because we will eventually win.  I am hesitant to believe that we have the advantage in reducing terror; there is still an air of mistrust among Iraqi civilians.  However, I would like to believe that Iraqis would choose democracy over their previous life of dictatorship.

Analysis of Iraqi Troops

I’ve done my own analysis on the number of Iraqi Troops that have been in Iraq.  I personally feel that there is a lot of controversy involved with the troops that are currently in Iraq.  Although US troops plan to keep terrorism and violence down in Iraq, it also gives extremists groups a reson to keep fighting.  It has also given Iraqis the reason to believe that the US’ occupation of Iraq will lead to a “US dominion” over Iraq and other Middle East countries. 

After extensively researching, I have found that it is hard to get exact numbers and statistics for the number of troops in Iraq.  However, I have noticed some general trends.  Here are two excel graphs I have made from two sources:

The figures in these two graphs differ greatly.  However, I noticed that both graphs show that there were about 150,000 troops during the Iraq Invasion in March 2003 (which is relatively high) and then gradually fell.  An interesting observation was that the number of troops increased during relatively new governmental innovations, such as the parliamentary elections (December 2005).  The number of troops also increased in November, 2006 when Saddam Hussein was given his death sentence and the number of terrorist attacks rose again in Iraq. 

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen, admits that “additional troops [provide] security for political actions to take place” (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=50582).  I am sure that terrorist attacks increase as the new democratic government is put in place.  However, I hope this is not infered as a US measure to make sure that their governent is “safely” and undeniably implemented in Iraq.  Mullen eventually hopes to decrease the number of US troops and transfer them to Afghanistan, to achieve the same “progress” in Iraq.