From Dream to Nightmare
By BOB HERBERT

Published: April 30, 2004 - NY Times


At least 10 more American soldiers died yesterday in George W. Bush's senseless war in Iraq.

They died for a pipe dream, which the American Heritage Dictionary defines as a fantastic notion or a vain hope. "Pipe dream" originally referred to the fantasies induced by smoking a pipe of opium. The folks who led us into this hideous madness in Iraq, against the wishes of most of the world, sure seem to have been smoking something.

President Bush and his hyperhawk vice president, Dick Cheney, were busy yesterday lip-syncing their way through an appearance before the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks. If you want a hint of how much trouble the U.S. is in, consider that these two gentlemen are still clinging to the hope that weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq.

Reality was the first casualty of Iraq. This was a war that would be won on the cheap, we were told, with few American casualties. The costs of reconstruction would be more than covered by Iraqi oil revenues. The Iraqi people, giddy with their first taste of freedom, would toss petals in the path of their liberators. And democracy, successfully rooted in Iraq, would soon spread like the flowers of spring throughout the Middle East.

Oh, they must have been passing the pipe around.

My problem with the warrior fantasies emerging from the comfort zones of Washington and Crawford, Tex., is that they are being put to the test in the flaming reality of combat in Iraq, not by the fantasizers but by brave and patriotic men and women who deserve so much more from the country they are willing to defend with their lives.

There is nothing new about this. It seemed to take forever for American leaders to realize that they were lost in a pipe dream in Vietnam. A key government spokesman during a crucial period of that conflict was Barry Zorthian, the public information officer for American forces in Vietnam from 1964 to 1968. In a book published last year, "Patriots: The Vietnam War Remembered From All Sides," Mr. Zorthian is quoted as saying:

"We probably could have gotten the deal we ended up with in 1973 as early as 1969. And between 1969 and 1972 we almost doubled our losses. It's easy to second-guess but I've never been convinced that those last 25,000 casualties were justified."

The sad truth about Iraq is that one year after President Bush gaudily proclaimed victory with his "Top Gun" moment aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, we don't know what we're doing in Iraq. We don't know where we're heading. We don't know how many troops it will take to get us there. And we don't know how to get out.

Flower petals strewn in our path? Forget about that. The needle on the hate-America meter in Iraq is buried deep in the bright red danger zone. Even humanitarian aid groups have had to hustle American and other non-Iraqi workers out of the country because of fears that they would be kidnapped, shot or bombed.

A USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll found that only a third of Iraqis believe the U.S.-led occupation is doing more good than harm. The poll was taken in late March and early April, and it's a safe bet that if the results have changed at all in the past few weeks, they've only gotten worse.

There is nothing surprising about the poll's findings. The U.S. primed Iraq with a "shock and awe" bombing campaign, then invaded, and is attempting to impose our concept of democracy at the point of a gun.

Why would anybody think that would work?

Since then we've destroyed countless homes and legitimate businesses and killed or maimed thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, including many women and children. That was a lousy strategy for winning hearts and minds in Vietnam and it's a lousy strategy now.

Equally unsurprising is the erosion of support for the war among Americans. There's no upside. Casualties are mounting daily and so are the financial costs, which have never been honestly acknowledged or budgeted.

Mr. Bush has enmeshed us in a war that we can't win and that we don't know how to end. Each loss of a life in this tragic exercise is a reminder of lessons never learned from history. And the most fundamental of those lessons is that fantasy must always genuflect before reality.  

If Bob (thewhitemaniskeepingmedown) Herbert thinks that all is lost beyond hope in Iraq, then my belief that things will eventually improve just got a little stronger.

RLTW

Is now that we are there, we have no choice but to somehow develop a country that works for it's citizens.  If the US pull out without accomplishing that end then we should expect to have more major attacks on our soil.
    One of the telling statements that I read after the Marines pulled back some in Fallujah Iraq was from one of the Iraqi troops that took their place.  His statement was something like "If the Americans were men, they would have stayed and fought".  If we pull out after starting a fight the we should not have started at the time it was started, then we will be considered cowards who will crumble if significant bloodshed is inflicted upon us - those who come to face us on our own soil will have that belief seared in their minds.  To defeat them, we will have to be willing to show courage and sacrifice of an extent that has not been visible in our national psyche probaly since World War II.
    As traumatic as they were, the attacks on the US on 9/11 did not bring forth the force of will that we will need to defeat the type of people who planned, financed and carried out the attacks.  When we are right, and I am 100% sure that we were right to invade Afganistan as a consequence of the attacks on us, we must have leaders who will steel us for a grinding battle that will be waged with intense focus, until the force of right conquer and destroy that of evil.  
    I do not see anyone leading us to such steely resolve, our president seems to be highly interested in raising as much campaign contributions as he can and avoiding admitting that he has made some tactical errors and his main challenger cannot seem to take a firm stance on important issues and weather the criticism that taking a stand often brings.  All the other alternatives appear to be single issue zealots who are frozen by their inability to adapt to a broader reality that often confounds them.

pissing their pants and licking the boots of US Soldiers as they waltzed into Iraq in both Iraq wars?  From what I have seen so far, the Iraqi ideal of heroism is BACKBITING!

Pardon me for saying so, but WHAT BULLSHIT!

As far as raising campaign funds, I wonder if Stilltryin25 was at all upset about Bill Clintons renting out the Lincoln Bedroom for a few campaign bucks while he was sending our men into Bosnia?  Where, I must add, they still are!  Or too busy watching the US Open to take a call from Sandy Berger to take out Bin Laden?

Political fundraising is a reality, get over it!

Interesting thing about the Balkan campaign.

Bill Clinton is the firsr Commander in Chief in the history of the world to win a war without a land invasion.  And this was against all advice.

Addtionally, unlike Bush, no US troopers have died in the Balkan War. not during or in post war Bosnia/Kosovo.

Bush can't say that.

Big problem with this argument.

Iraq and Hussein had nothing whatsoever with the 9/11 attacks or ANY attack on the US.
Where on earth did yu get the idea that Iraq had attacked the US?

If you could explain how my statements are bullshit instead of spewing the drivel into the air that you coughed out in your post.  I stand by every word I wrote, we have no prominent politician of courage in either the republican or democratic party, except for John McCain at times.  That I have to write what I just wrote makes me sad.  No person of courage will make it through the primaries because voting in them has become predominantly the domain of extremists - this is a condition that moderates, to a large extent, have themselves to blame for. We are too often not worked up enough to insure that we vote in primaries.

-- Modified on 5/4/2004 6:50:26 PM

you simply misinterpreted them.  I did not say that Iraq had attacked the US on 9/11/2001.  If it makes you feel any better, I think starting a war in Iraq when we had major unfinished business in Afganistan was foolish.  But of course, you did not seem to catch that subtlety.

And we still have troops in Germany, and most every other country in the world too. I believe it may be called strategic deployment.

"His statement was something like "If the Americans were men, they would have stayed and fought"."

In that the book of Iraqi "Heroics in Battle" may be even shorter than the book of "French Heroics in Battle", I have decided that the comment you posted from an Iraqi soldier is just "bullshit"!  Even if he did say it!

That you think the President is not focusing on the Iraq War is just assinine partisanship. i.e., Bullshit!

As far as John McCain is concerned, the only times the left likes him is when he agrees with them, something he is doing way too often for my vote.  Just for giggles, I wonder if you consider Zell Miller (Sen D-GA) a moderate?  I would guess not, but you might surprise me.  Just a reminder though, Miller has endorsed Bush and has founded the national organization, "Democrats for Bush and McCain is the Bush Reelection Chairman for the State of Arizona.  Seems like at least one of the people you claim to respect is supporting President Bush.