Final Blog

 

 

 

At the commencement of this course, I considered a social movement just a protest in which people engaged themselves in activism to surface their voices. As this course concludes, I leave with extensive knowledge of the topic. I now recognize these movements harbor frames, emotion, tactics (structured and non- structured), collective identities, etc. In addition I have come to see that there are many other movements surrounding that of the anti- war in Iraq movement. There are movements that are protesting the use of torture, human rights, families with soldiers abroad, families who have lost loved ones, in addition to many more. It may appear that this movement has lost momentum, however I believe it has not. More is to come. With the recent “withdrawal “ of U.S troops there are quick concerns surfacing. This includes the protest of complete withdrawal of all U.S troops. “U.S. troop combat missions throughout Iraq are not scheduled to end until more than a year from now in August of 2010. In addition, U.S. troops are not scheduled for a complete withdrawal for another two and a half years on December 31, 2011. Rather, U.S. troops are leaving Iraqi cities for military bases in Iraq. They are still in Iraq, and they can be summoned back at any time.” (Dennis Kucinich 2009). I see this façade of U.S troop “withdrawal” will only fuel this movement. An article by United for Peace and Justice states “With the latest poll of Iraqis finding that 73% want the U.S. to leave and with U.S. defense costs exploding because of the war and occupation, we look forward to the day when we can celebrate with Iraqis a true victory: a complete end to the U.S. war and occupation of Iraq and the restoration of Iraq to Iraqis.” (United for Peace and Justice 2009).

 

From the start of the course I had very strong opinions about the U.S’s involvement in Iraq. I simply did not approve of it, seeing it as not very organized and/or thought of, as well as a sly excuse to get oil. I believed our troops should not be there at all. As the course ends, I in spite of it all, am walking away with the disapproval of our involvement. However it is in a much different sense. I now feel that president Obama has taken the right steps in withdrawing the troops. Although many troops still remain on military bases arguably within the city walls, I think this could prove to be a good move. The conflict in Iran could very much happen in Iraq, and I feel it would be best to have a few troops close by at hand to prevent chaos in case of an emergency. I thought about this after thinking of an article I read on Cuba and the legalization of cell phones. This took place at the time Raul Castro took over for his brother Fidel. Word was flying around of the intense reform that was to come (which really has not). Some people were analyzing this as dangerous claiming that rapid reform can be very dangerous. I wholly concur with this, thus being the reason why I feel Obama made a decent move. “Many observers have predicted that a post-Fidel Cuba will follow a cautious, incremental reform strategy rather than a more fast-paced approach-similar to those implemented by Deng Xiaoping, the architect of China's economic liberalization after Mao's death. Indeed, there are many voices urging Cuba to avoid the "shock therapy" pursued by the socialist countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, and to copy instead the slower reforms pursued by China-"crossing the river while feeling the stones" in Deng's phrase.” (Raj M. Desai 2008)

It was said a rapid increase in reform could almost definitely be a poor decision and lead to disorder. This is the possibility at stake in Iran. I understand there is an economic issue at hand along with many other issues. However the United States allegedly was in Iraq to take out Suddam Hussein and promote a democracy. Even if there was not a democracy in Iraq, someone should be there to baby-sit in order to make sure things calm down. There are times when I think about George W. Bush’s administration and the people who supported the war as obtuse. On the other hand I feel these people really did have a desire to help the people of Iraq who were under Suddam’s rule. There was/is a large amount of destruction in Iraq. Then again when isn’t there after a war. I feel equally as Jed Morey when he states, “For better or for worse, the Bush Doctrine gave America something that it has been missing since the Cuban Missile Crisis—a little touch of crazy. This war proved that you can poke the bear one too many times. It showed that we will throw you out of your house, kill you in front of your friends, marry your wife and rename your kids. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, mind you, but it’s a lousy way to win friends and influence people”. Bush could have definitely gone about the situation in Iraq more diplomatic (save for the Suddam Hussein issue, he was crazy).

 

All things considered, I am not sure where I am at. I do not want to say I am in the middle. Perhaps I am. All I know is that I do not highly approve war, especially when the government cannot give a valid basis for it. I also do not support violence as a manner to resolve conflict. I did not support the war in Iraq when it occurred, but I do support the stationing of a few troops on military bases. That is if they do not involve themselves with anything while being there unless asked to do so. I hope for peace in Iraq and a government that their people approve of. It is not our choice. Good luck Iraq! May the future bring you happiness!

 

Scholarly Resources:

http://www.longislandpress.com/2009/07/02/war-is-over/

 

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474977726801&grpId=3659174697241980

 

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/8741/

 

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/28/lessons-for-raul/print/

 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/01/iraq.kirkuk.bombing/index.html#cnnSTCText