Kucinich on Iraq

Clayton Cramer has some comments on an e-mail sent around by Kucinich supporters. Kucinich gets a few of the critical details about Iraq wrong.

Dennis Kucinich - kucinich.us

*The Kucinich Plan for Iraq*

Dear Friends,

In November of 2006, after an October upsurge in violence in Iraq, the American people moved decisively to reject Republican rule, principally because of the conduct of the war. Democratic leaders well understand we

Nope. There was certainly some voters who rejected Republicans because of the war, but this was more a rejection of how well it was being fought, than the idea of the war itself. The largest group that switched in November did so because of Republican inability to rein in corrupt members.

regained control of the Congress because of the situation in Iraq. However, two months later, the Congress is still searching for a plan around which it can unite to hasten the end of US involvement in Iraq and the return home of 140,000 US troops.

There are 140,000 troops remaining in Iraq right now. What about them?

Oddly enough, there is more support for the Iraq War among soldiers serving there than among Americans that are here. Perhaps because they have a clearer understanding of the situation.

The US sent our troops into Iraq without a clear mission. We created a

No, the mission was clear: overthrow Saddam Hussein; clean out WMDs; and establish a democratic state. There were clearly failures to accomplish this last mission, at least partly because of serious errors in judgment by the Bush Administration in the first year of the occupation.

financial, military and moral dilemma for our nation and now we are talking about the Iraq war as our problem. The Iraqis are forgotten. Their country has been destroyed: 650,000 casualties, [based on the Lancet Report which surveyed casualties from March of 2003 to July of 2006] the shredding of the social fabric of the nation, civil war, lack

No one (except perhaps Kucinich) really believes that Lancet article. The numbers fail all rational measurements (as I, and many others, have discussed before), because it would require more than 1000 deaths a day for most days of the occupation. Even other antiwar groups, such as iraqbodycount.com, assert the numbers are absurdly inflated.

of access to food, shelter, electricity, clean drinking water and health care because this Administration, with the active participation of the Congress, authorized a war without reason, without conscience, without international law.

Wrong on all counts. The concern about WMDs was real, and widely shared, not just by the U.S. government, but by every governmental intelligence service around the world.

Without support of international law is a false claim. The existing resolutions that the UN Security Council had passed provided sufficient basis for action. Iraqi funding of terrorist activities, as well as providing asylum for one of those indicted in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, as well as providing asylum for Abu Nidal (who led the hijacking of the Achille Lauro which led to the murder of U.S. citizen Leon Klinghoffer) all provided sufficient international law justification.

*These are the elements of the Kucinich Plan: *

*1. The US announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw.*

The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of a long-term presence as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A US declaration of an intention to withdraw troops and

Wrong. The insurgency, much of driven by non-Iraqis, started within a month of the occupation, and before any indication of permanent bases.

close bases will help dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who have supported US policy. Furthermore this will provide an opening where parties within Iraq and in the region can set the stage for negotiations towards peaceful settlement.

This is delusion, at best. The native forces involved are using power tools to torture people to death. No surprise: this is part of how the Baathist government operated for decades.

The foreign fighters, on the other hand, have repeatedly stated that only one thing will stop their attacks, not just in Iraq, but everywhere, and that is a world that is Islamic.

*3. Order a simultaneous return of all US contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government.*

The contracting process has been rife with world-class corruption, with contractors stealing from the US Government and cheating the Iraqi people, taking large contracts and giving 5% or so to Iraqi subcontractors.

Actually, much of the corruption has involved Iraqis, where it is, after all, a part of their culture.

It is noteworthy that after the first Gulf War, Iraqis reestablished electricity within three months, despite sanctions. Four years into the US occupation there is no water, nor reliable electricity in Baghdad, despite massive funding from the US and from the Madrid conference. The

Yes, because there weren't forces running around Iraq blowing up power lines and killing repair crews. Police states are very efficient that way.

greatest mystery involves the activities of private security companies who function as mercenaries. Reports of false flag operations must be investigated by an international tribunal.

Which is more credible? That private security companies are pretending to be al-Qaeda operatives? Or that a group that has engaged in mass murder and rape of civilians in East Timor, in East Africa, in Spain, in Britain, and in America, is doing this? Kucinich is part of why the left is completely unbelievable--that they are prepared to believe this, rather than the obvious.

*4. Convene a regional conference for the purpose of developing a security and stabilization force for Iraq*.

The focus should be on a process which solves the problems of Iraq. The US has told the international community, "This is our policy and we want you to come and help us implement it." The international community may have an interest in helping Iraq, but has no interest in participating in the implementation of failed US policy.

This is delusion of the highest order. Iran has for decades sought to dominate the Persian Gulf, under both the Shah and the Ayatollahs. The notion that they will suddenly be primarily interested in stability in Iraq--a country that caused them enormous suffering during the eight year war between those two countries--is idiocy.

A shift in US policy away from unilateralism and toward cooperation will

Unilateralism? There were 38 countries that participated in the invasion of Iraq.

provide new opportunities for exploring common concerns about the plight of Iraq. The UN is the appropriate place to convene, through the office of the Secretary General, all countries that have interests, concerns and influence, including the five permanent members of the Security Council and the European community, and all Arab nations.

The Secretary General's office has been a serious source of corruption through bribes involving the Oil for Food program, and even involving outgoing Sec. Gen. Annan's son.

And with that, he gives up.