By Brian Bohl
WASHINGTON-Voluminous accounts continue to be produced about World War II with no single work possessing the ability to articulate the magnitude of the era. But without the aid of words, sounds or moving images, the national memorial that rests near the Lincoln Memorial here provides a heartbreakingly poignant chronology of how armed services members went from civilians to defenders of freedom-encapsulating a struggle in which over 400,000 Americans were killed.
From left to right, separate engravings show the different stages of battle. It starts with a depiction of a soldier waving goodbye to family members and traces the journey through different combat stages. Before entering the circular memorial, visitors see the final scene: the leaders of two sides shaking hands, representing a peace agreement and the end of violence.
There is a distinct possibility that in the future, a memorial to the war in Iraq will be built in the same area that currently hosts the sites dedicated to World War II, Korea and Vietnam. The only problem is that a war needs to end before it can be remembered, which might require many years because of an unstable neophyte government and a nation divided by religious and ideological differences.
Fortunately, casualty numbers in Iraq will mostly likely not reach anywhere close to the death tolls that accompanied other major conflicts. But a former top military leader suggests that the war’s end might have been expiated if not for the failure of civilian leadership.
While President Bush continues to exhort the value of his troop surge, the former top American commander in the region said the White House and administrators have pitted the U.S. in a “living nightmare with no end in sight.”
“There has been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders,” retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez said.
Sanchez’s credibility stems from his tenure as the commander of coalition troops beginning in June 2003. He was one of the major decision makers at the outset of the Iraq war, though his military career was ended because of the Abu Ghraib scandal.
Are Sanchez’s statements just a vitriolic diatribe from a disgruntled military leader? His caustic criticisms were probably provoked in part because of bitterness, but his comments do warrant consideration. The troop surge that provided an additional 30,000 additional forces was hailed as a necessary step by the Bush administration-adding troops at a time when the majority of the public wanted more soldiers to be pulled out of the region. Sanchez ripped into the surge, calling it a “desperate attempt by the administration that has not accepted the political and economic realities of this war.”
The current wave of criticism for the long-term planning in Iraq didn’t originate from a Democratic presidential candidate or anti-war activists holding protests around this city. It came from a military professional; a high-ranking officer directly involved at a crucial stage of the war.
This should provide reassurances to lawmakers-and the White House-of the seriousness of the past errors, something Bush refused for years to acknowledge and currently just whitewashes by asking that the public simply look toward the future.
The past cannot be erased, and the future discourse of the war is important. It still doesn’t mean egregious mistakes in the initial planning are irrelevant or should escape scrutiny. In fact, reading a transcript of Sanchez’s words can provide perspective about what can be done in the future to ensure an ending to a conflict that will actually surpass the length of World War II.
Sanchez said the failure of Congress, the State Department and intelligence agencies to stand up and challenge the Bush administration about the original claims helped set the course of current situation. If there is one positive to come from this war, it could be the fact that public officials, intergovernmental organizations and especially the public will be more vigilant in challenging the rationale of going to war based on specious evidence for conflicts in the future. Maybe a new memorial for soldiers fighting in Iraq will be able to be completed by that point.
Brian Bohl is a senior print journalism student. You may e-mail him at [email protected].
(Julia Gardiner)