Marine General Peter Pace is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the main military designer of the Iraq War. Gen Pace admitted the mistake of assuming “that the Iraq people and Iraq army would welcome liberation.” Nevertheless, he said in hindsight he would still have recommended the Iraq invasion with a bigger U.S. occupation force.

This troubling statement smacks of colonialism. He admits that he would invade Iraq even knowing the Iraqis people opposed the invasion and the occupation. This implies a purpose for U.S. interests over Iraqi interests. Pace and President Bush claim the U.S. is still on the right path “providing additional freedom for the Iraqis and Afghanis and for us at home.

American top civilian and military leaders refuse to admit the Iraqi people are not free. People are not free when a foreign military force occupies their nation against their will. They are not free as long as President Bush and not Iraq Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki directs security forces in their nation.  

Gen Pace’s comments are alarming, because he obviously does not see the contradiction in his position. It is frightening that the top U.S. military commander understands the principles of freedom so poorly that he sees a contested occupation as extending freedom.

I also question Pace’s assertion the Iraq invasion and military occupation provides added freedom at home. Resolution of the Iraq domestic turmoil will afford Americans no additional freedoms not guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. However, our continued U.S. military presence in Iraq and the Middle East can reduce U.S. security.

Al Qaida was not a significant presence in Iraq before the U.S. occupation. Now al Qaida increased its influence enough that even Iraqi insurgents fight them as a threat. Ironically, U.S. commanders now arm Iraq insurgents to fight al Qaida. They do so over objection of Iraq’s central government whom supposedly we are there to support.

Saddam Hussein did not have an air force, army or navy to threaten the U.S. homeland. Iraq and Iran were opposing forces in the Middle East that kept each in check. Now, Iran looms as a huge unchecked military and economic power in the region since the U.S. invasion destroyed Iraq’s government and its military. 

President Bush insists that Iran and Syria, Iraq’s neighbors, must have no influence over Iraq now or in the Middle East later. Current U.S. policy already defeats this Bush goal. Hundreds of thousands of Iraq refugees flee into Iran and Syria to escape the U.S. occupation created violence at home. Therefore, Iran and Syria exert influence in Iraq’s present and future just by accepting Iraqi refugees.

The U.S. suffers a public relations defeat in Iraq and the Middle East, because Bush emphasizes military might over the human element. Those grateful returning Iraqi refugees will act as diplomats at large for Iran and Syria no matter Bush’s declarations. In contrast, Bush and Congress destroy goodwill when they publicly rebuke Iraq Prime Minister al-Maliki as if he is their disobedient student.

No matter how or why we got there, it is time for the U.S. military to leave Iraq. I like presidential candidate Obama’s solution. Give notice the U.S. is leaving in a set time, like four months from now. Then, pack up and leave at the scheduled time.

Some war supporters claim that we cut and run if we leave without victory. This claim presumes an enemy that we fear. We won the war of invasion and already lost the war for public opinion in Iraq. This is proven by the fact the central government the U.S. backs still lacks enough popular support to govern the nation without U.S. troop support.

The U.S military is not fighting a war in Iraq. It is serving as Iraq’s army and its national police force. Secondarily, it tries the impossible task of mediating a civil war with U.S. military force. Nobody identified either side as an enemy threat to the U.S. homeland. So, if we leave Iraq now we do not leave as a defeated army. We leave as frustrated peacemakers whose services the Iraqi people rejected.

U.S. foreign policy mistakes broke Iraq. Still, the continuing violence in Iraq is a sectarian dispute. The U.S. military cannot solve this dispute. Only the Iraqi people and their leaders can do it. They may act with more resolve absent U.S. involvement. They already showed willingness to fight al Qaida. 

Kenneth Brooks is an independent writer. Contact him at P.O. Box 882, Vallejo, CA 94590.  Opinion@ethicalego.com