Senate candidates should address Iraq issue
By Roy Ockert Jr.
Aug. 12, 2014
Thanks to millions of dollars from anonymous groups, Arkansas’ campaign for the U.S. Senate so far has produced much sound and fury but little substance. The battle, it seems, is over who can produce the most annoying television commercials.
The only serious issues between the two candidates are: (1) a debate over debates and (2) what’s misleading about the other guy’s commercials. Of course, for Republican Tom Cotton, there is the standard throw-in line about how “Obamacare” is wrecking the country.
What has been missing is a discussion over the story that has been dominating newspaper front pages and TV newscasts for several weeks — what to do about Iraq. You’d think the Senate has nothing to say about whether the country goes to war.
And yet the United States seems to be on the verge of doing just that. President Barack Obama, who promised to end America’s war in Iraq and did, last week authorized air strikes on militants trying to take over Iraq, both to protect Iraqi citizens and American personnel in the country. Now we’re arming Kurdish troops battling elements of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, an offshoot of Al-Qaida so brutal that it has been disowned by al-Qaida leaders.
While Obama promises that American troops will not get involved, that’s going to be a difficult promise to keep. Sooner or later, one of the manned U.S. planes will be shot down or American “advisers” will be attacked, and our involvement will have to escalate.
Leaders of the Islamic State will be delighted to take on the “Great Satan,” at least for a while.
This brings up the old argument about whether the United States can be the world’s policeman. By all accounts, ISIS is the real devil in this conflict, forcing Iraqi Christians and other religious sects to adopt fundamentalist Islamic views and customs or face death by horrible means.
After taking control of about one-third of Syria, ISIS has extended its reach into western Iraq, where dissatisfaction with the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has grown rapidly since Obama pulled U.S. troops out of the country in late 2011.
Republicans have been critical of the troop withdrawal, but Obama had the support of the American people, who were tired of a 9-year-old war that many felt never should have been started. A year later he was re-elected with similar plans to get U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, where we’ve been even longer.
Why should this be an issue in the Arkansas Senate campaign? How can it not be?
Since 2003 the United States has spent $817 billion to fund the war in Iraq. And that doesn’t count the greater cost —the lives of some 4,500 American soldiers, 32,000 Americans wounded and anywhere between 100,000 to 500,000 Iraqi deaths. All of that will add up to $4 to $6 trillion, according to various estimates. And the spending for the medical and disability needs of U.S. veterans will continue for many years.
Some of those numbers were and are Arkansas citizens. So certainly our candidates for the Senate should tell us what they think we should do about Iraq.
Instead, their TV ads and news releases argue about debate formats, who’s out touch and who can best deliver on “commonsense Arkansas values,” whatever those are.
You’d think Cotton would be especially interested in this issue since he is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, but his almost daily news releases haven’t mentioned Iraq except to point out that he served there.
However, last week at a cattlemen’s convention in Fort Smith, both candidates expressed concern about the president’s decision to attack ISIS forces by air, according to a City Wire report.
“We have to protect our American diplomats and other personnel there,” Cotton said, “and any time we can aid tens of thousands of religious minorities who are being persecuted by al-Qaida with food and water, we should. But overall it just shows the lack of a strategy the president has had in Iraq for the last three years, and really, since he became president, and the lack of an overall Middle East strategy that’s designed to protect America’s interests and defend our allies.”
“I really commend all of our men and women in uniform who are trying to deliver the humanitarian aid to the religious minority who are under siege right now,” Pryor said. “But I must say I share the concerns I think many Arkansans have about this becoming a deeper military commitment. So I know this is by nature, right now, humanitarian. And again, I think that is justified. And I think most people will support that because it is limited. So like the rest of us, I'm watching to see how this develops.”
That’s not exactly a clear, strong stand by either.
Cotton’s problem is that he doesn’t want to be seen supporting Obama’s actions, and Pryor’s is that he knows the American people don’t want to go back into Iraq.
In June, when things started deteriorating in Iraq, Cotton said that Obama should address the problem quickly, but a spokesman said the question of whether to send troops into action was premature.
If it was then, it isn’t now.
Roy Ockert is editor emeritus of The Jonesboro Sun. He may be reached by e-mail at royo@suddenlink.net.