Longtime readers of this column know that I opposed the Iraq War right from the beginning, even before then-President George W. Bush sent American combat troops into that unfortunate and long-suffering country.
Along with many of you, I was appalled when a strutting, flight suit-clad President Bush appeared on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln in May 2003 in front of a huge "Mission Accomplished" banner to declare the end of "major combat operations" in Iraq.
Nothing could have been further from the truth because the war went on for another eight years at a cost of nearly 4,500 American lives, more than 100,000 Iraqi lives and trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars.
And what did we accomplish? Not much.
President Barack Obama took credit for putting an end to that costly war last month when he announced the withdrawal of the last remaining American combat troops from Iraq. As those troops departed for home, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta claimed that "the mission of an Iraq that could govern and secure itself has become real."
Well, I give him two Pinocchios for that questionable statement. But what else could he say, given our huge investment in American blood and treasure?
And, as respected foreign affairs analyst Fouad Ajami wrote in the Wall Street Journal, "It was awkward to watch the president, with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki at his side, explaining as we exit that 'We think a successful, democratic Iraq can be a model for the entire region.'"
Successful? Democratic? Please!
As the president and his defense secretary spoke, sectarian violence flared between majority Shias and minority Sunnis in Iraq as dozens of innocent people were killed by roadside bombs and suicide bombers. Meanwhile, some 20,000 Americans remain in that war-torn country, 16,000 of them at the biggest-in-the-world U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and outlying consulates. I fear for the lives of those brave American diplomats and the security personnel who protect them.
So, are we out of Iraq? Not by a long shot.
The neoconservatives who persuaded Bush to go to war in Iraq criticized Obama for keeping his campaign promise to put an end to that ill-considered war of choice. Writing in the Weekly Standard, neoconservative academics Kimberly and Frederick Kagan asserted that "it's hard to stay focused on America's interests and security requirements" while Obama administration officials celebrate the "successful" withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and tout the "demilitarization" of U.S. foreign policy, which I endorse.
"The re-emergence of civil war in Iraq would be disastrous for the United States and its allies," they continued, "(and) would be an enormous political and moral defeat for the U.S."
Apparently, like Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, the Kagans want to send combat troops back into Iraq. Fortunately, that won't happen no matter who wins in November. The U.S. military is already spread too thin around the world, and unavoidable Defense Department budget cuts will force the next president to curtail, rather than expand, our involvement in the internal affairs of other countries.
• Guy W. Farmer, of Carson City, is a retired diplomat.
