Why We Should Stay Out Of Iraq
Benjamin H. Friedman, a Cato research fellow in defense and homeland security, writes at Cato that "the major reason using force to defend Iraq's government is a bad idea is that it always was":
Advocates of going into Iraq, like advocates of staying in Iraq in past years, tend to employ sunk costs logic, where the pursuit of a dumb idea before somehow makes it sensible now. Invocations of dead and wounded Americans' sacrifice give such thinking added resonance but do not make it sensible.Surge mythology notwithstanding, our efforts to reorder Iraq have always been misguided. The goal - a multiethnic, democratic, stable Iraq- was a nice idea but never vital to U.S. national security or worth thousands of U.S. lives and vast stores of our wealth. Our presence there did not stabilize Iraq, let alone the region, or keep oil prices down. Nor is regional stability or oil production worth much U.S. effort.
The idea that we need to fight ISIS because of its potential to use terrorism against the United States suffers similar flaws. During the Iraq War, hawks constantly warned that leaving Iraq would allow terrorist havens to form there. Their mental model was 1990s Afghanistan. They ignored the fact that al Qaeda (the original group that attacked Americans ) came from particular conflicts, rather than being some kind of plant that grew in failed states. And even in Afghanistan, the problem was more that the government -- the Taliban -- allied with al Qaeda, rather than the absence of government. And hawks forgot that U.S. gains in drones and surveillance technology since the 1990s had destroyed havens--now those were easy targets.
Today, we are repeatedly told that ISIS is more brutal than al Qaeda and thus a bigger danger to Americans. But that logic confuses an insurgency with a group focused on attacking Americans. ISIS is a nasty organization fond of terrorist violence, radical Islam, and Islamic caliphates, but not an obvious threat to Americans. Conflating morally noxious Islamists with those bent on killing Americans is one of the errors keeping us at endless war.
RELATED: The Iraq war was a bipartisan disaster.








RELATED: The Iraq war was a bipartisan disaster.
Racist, next you'll be claiming Obama initiated the same surge in Afghanistan as president that he lambasted as a senator when Bush called for it in Iraq.
Why do you hate black people?
lujlp at June 28, 2014 11:38 PM
It would be great, though irrelevant, if everybody was as stupid about this as possible.
Let's all pretend that we're only interested in 'our own vital interests,' or something like that.
This will make it easier to be all butthurt about it next time.
And Next Time will probably come before Halloween... It's big planet.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 29, 2014 2:10 AM
Jon Stewart has this one right, and it's not anywhere near a laughing matter.
We can "intervene" in other countries without any regard to where the money comes from, but fixing things in this country is out of the question, because it will cost too much.
Fix the infrastructure and create jobs? Where will we get the money?
Fix the VA hospitals and other veterans benefits? Sorry, those cost too much. Oh, and thanks for your service.
Bail out banks and other big businesses? No problem.
Continue tax breaks for the 1%? Not an issue.
Fly drones all over the world to protect our interests? Well, that's unquestionably necessary. Apparently missiles and fuel for that kind of thing are free.
But millions of Americans living below the poverty line cannot be helped because there is no money for it.
drcos at June 29, 2014 4:27 AM
$500 million, as I recall.
$450 million will be used as bribes or otherwise lost to graft.
The only reason to go back to Iraq is to kill as many members of ISIS as we can.
I R A Darth Aggie at June 29, 2014 8:32 AM
"Our overarching message is simply that market forces, modified by the cartel behavior of OPEC, determine most of the key factors that affect oil supply and prices. The United States does not need to be militarily active or confrontational to allow the oil market to function, to allow oil to get to consumers, or to ensure access in coming decades."
There is a fungible world market for that oil. Countries that have nothing to trade worth having will attempt to use military force to take the oil from any thugocracy that looks like an easy target.
Our economy doesn't rely on oil, it relies on cheap energy.
Both onerous environmental regulations, and unstable regimes controlling major oil regions will lead to chancy supplies and unstable ever increasing prices.
Expect your standard of living, medical care, and travel to decline accordingly.
It won't be just gas you will pay double for, it will be everything produced more than a mile away from where you live, as our government frantically prints money to disguise the fact that they spend much more than they take in.
Hint, your salary will not go up accordingly. as the prices double again, and then triple.
If you are retired it will really suck.
As industries producing luxuries go away, and all those people become unemployed, the economy will contract even further, most likely entering a death spiral for everything but must have items.
Contrary to popular opinion, we cant create wealth by selling hamburgers to each other.
I thought Cato, in general had some smart economists.
Apparently they have their share of nitwits also.
Isab at June 29, 2014 8:52 AM
http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/about_us/25.htm
Oh, and read a little about OPEC member countries and see if any confidence in them keeping a lid of things is justified.
The guys at CATO seem to have a terminal case of absolute unfounded faith in bureaucracies composed of third world dictators.
Isab at June 29, 2014 9:04 AM
The reason ISIS wants to establish a caliphate in Iraq and Syria is to have a base for attacks on the West. I'd say that's an obvious threat to America.
Conan the Grammarian at June 29, 2014 10:34 AM
Since the "poverty line" is an arbitrary measure invented by politicians and economists, why don't we simply just adjust it downward and move millions of people out of poverty at no cost?
Conan the Grammarian at June 29, 2014 10:37 AM
"The reason ISIS wants to establish a caliphate in Iraq and Syria is to have a base for attacks on the West"
ISIS will have to defeat their age-old Shia foes first. Why don't we let them kill each other?
Jason S. at June 29, 2014 11:02 AM
ISIS will have to defeat their age-old Shia foes first. Why don't we let them kill each other?
Posted by: Jason S. at June 29, 2014 11:02 AM
Because Suni Shia sectarian violence has for the last 60 years, so effectively prevented terrorist attacks against western democracies?
And a lot of innocent third parties will end up in the crossfire.
If the Shia fundamemtalists and the Suni fundamemtalists are united in anything, it is against the infidel.
The governments in the Middle East have been pushing this meme for the last forty years to keep their own asses in power.
Isab at June 29, 2014 11:40 AM
> $500 million, as I recall.
Ding ding! Winner! Amy, send him out a sun visor and sports bottle.
What does "IRA Darth Aggie" mean, anyway?
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 29, 2014 12:04 PM
Guysssth... Listhen! LISTHEN, YOU GUYSSSTH!
YOU GUUUUUYYYYYYSSSSSSSTHTH........
The United States —by dint of geography, geology, heritage and stunning good looks— will continue to dominate the globe as the traveling military player of overwhelming potency and competence.
That is going to happen. Do'worrya boutit.
Meanwhile, Japan, China, India and others are expanding their military capacity to defend their interests. As we would expect.
That's Ok, too. We want that to happen.
The United States' material needs are going to be met no matter what. We are almost uniquely blessed with frackable hydrocarbons, and we have friends and investors all over the globe.
It's China that's going to be the buyer for Meast oil... Why shouldn't we expect the Chinese to do whatever killing and nation-building is required to get it? They'll never have the resources, or the motive, to pester the United States.
Meanwhile, the United States will, again and again, be dragged into regional conflicts around the world.
That too is as certain as tomorrow's sunrise.
You can hold your breath, turn blue, and pee your pants if you want... But a nation as wealthy and strong and compassionate as ours doesn't just petulantly fold its arms and turn away when huge populations slaughter each other for no good reason.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 29, 2014 12:33 PM
Another development in the area is the emergence of the Kurds.
Now the Kurds are selling oil to Israel through Turkish pipelines. So the Kurds and Turks are cooperating, which is surprising. Maybe this alliance will grow stronger and stable.
Jason S. at June 29, 2014 3:00 PM
Sorry about the two "Meanwhile,"'s.
Can we still be friends?
Faboo.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 29, 2014 10:41 PM
HEH. AS IF, Cridmo.
Read it an' weep:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/islamic-state-declares-caliphate-seizes-osama-bin-ladens-dream-n144221
Flynne at June 30, 2014 11:22 AM
I don't see your point.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 30, 2014 1:45 PM
Point is, dahlink, many many people pooh-poohed the very idea of the New Caliphate ever being established. And now, here it is, actually happening. And the article further states that this will make a swell staging ground for attacks elsewhere.
Flynne at June 30, 2014 3:04 PM
> many people pooh-poohed the very idea of the
> New Caliphate ever being established.
Never heard the idea expressed; never heard it poohed.
The world continues to show no interest in connecting the region to modernity; in the interim of American involvement, Iraq had no sister cities in California, even in the similar desert regions.
But —
> this will make a swell staging ground
— Yes, they'll be reaching out to modernity anyway. In my fondest hopes, it will be towards the newly-invested Chindians.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 30, 2014 4:55 PM
Now the Kurds are selling oil to Israel through Turkish pipelines. So the Kurds and Turks are cooperating, which is surprising. Maybe this alliance will grow stronger and stable.
Posted by: Jason S. at June 29, 2014 3:00 PM
Jason, How old are you?
Just because someone allows you to sell a valuable commodity at one of their ports, and transfer it from one tanker to another does not mean you have a budding diplomatic relationship with that country.
Palms were greased.
The Kurds have no country. This was pirated oil, sold for cash on the barrel head. The fact that it happened at a Turkish port means that someone there was willing to look the other way for the right price.
Isab at June 30, 2014 6:04 PM
Moments ago on the computer "internet"—
Please note how neatly this comports with my own words in this space a scant thirty hours earlier:
You want me on this blog. You NEED me on this blog.
Dammit, all of you, every last one of you, owes me love.
Additionally, the attractive women owe me sex.
Many of the less-attractive women, as well.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at June 30, 2014 6:53 PM
Hahaha, Isab, you're hilarious, madame.
Grey Ghost might have you pegged on the previous thread.
Veritably, I am an idiot -- but I do have 95% of the answers to the current problems in the Middle East, if people would just listen to me. Dammit!
You know I'm right.
Here:
Yes, you're right, the Kurds haven't yet declared an independent state, but it's looking more likely -- that is, if our current Sec of State Kerry doesn't persuade them to stay with Bagdhad, which he's been jawing about at the moment.
Why would the Kurds stay with that clusterfuck? As Michael Yon said the other day, "Full power to Kurds and good luck."
Jason S. at June 30, 2014 9:16 PM
How ya like me now?
Jason S. at June 30, 2014 11:09 PM
"Yes, you're right, the Kurds haven't yet declared an independent state, but it's looking more likely -- that is, if our current Sec of State Kerry doesn't persuade them to stay with Bagdhad, which he's been jawing about at the moment."
They have neither the military, money, or the technology to maintain an independent state or defend and control the oil that lies under their territory.
History says their chances of doing so are slim to none.
Isab at July 1, 2014 4:01 AM
The Peshmerga did what Iraq's military couldn't -- they stabalized Kirkuk, and are now digging in and are ready to fight ISIS. Turkey has agreed to increase oil transport. The Kurds are ready and looking for investors.
But some Turks don't like the idea of independence and neither does Baghdad, so it should be interesting to watch.
Jason S. at July 1, 2014 8:06 AM
The Peshmerga did what Iraq's military couldn't -- they stabalized Kirkuk, and are now digging in and are ready to fight ISIS. Turkey has agreed to increase oil transport. The Kurds are ready and looking for investors.
But some Turks don't like the idea of independence and neither does Baghdad, so it should be interesting to watch.
Posted by: Jason S. at July 1, 2014 8:06 AM
I am sure the Turks can find some nice relocation camps for the Kurds in Iraq, just as soon as they allow the Turks to handle all those messy oil sales for them.
I don't find genocide interesting to watch. I prefer that the US wield their big stick, and keep things stable, if possible, because the alternative has seldom worked out better for anyone.
Isab at July 1, 2014 9:23 AM
I'd interdict the whole region for 50 years. Shot down and scuttle everything that attempt to cross the set line from either side.
Nothing in, nothing out. Not even oil.
No exception, no peacekeeping mission to check on their progress, no oil for food. Occasional bombing missions to destroy large scale metal works.
Leave em be for 50 years and then see if they want to keep being cut off or if they are read to play nice.
Its the birth place of agriculture. They'll survive without oil money or electricity.
lujlp at July 1, 2014 11:28 AM
I'd do psychological warfare.
How? A squadron of C-17s flying a raster scan across Iraq, with the load masters shoveling Valium out the back, until Iraqis couldn't tell the difference between a Kalishnikov and a cat.
Jeff Guinn at July 1, 2014 10:13 PM
Leave a comment