Here is an imagined conversation between a normal human being and one of those people who still thinks our troops should be in Iraq.

“Q: Why did we invade Iraq?

A:To stop Saddam Hussein developing and using ‘Weapons of mass Destruction’.

Q. But he didn’t have any, did he?

A: No, but he might have done, and why are you complaining, do you think brutal dictators are good, is that it? Are you some kind of Fascist?

Q: Hang on a minute, I only pointed out that the main reason for the war turned out to be fake. What do you say to that?

A: Well, I generally try to change the subject, and I will now do so again. The great achievement of the invasion was to establish a true democracy in Iraq.

Q: Ah, well in that case, why can’t we just leave this nice new democracy to get on with running the country?

A: Don’t be silly. Haven’t you noticed that there is virtually a civil war going on in Iraq?

Q: I’m asking the questions. But yes I have noticed. Why is there a civil war if it’s a democracy? Surely the whole idea of democracies is that the people’s will can be expressed without violence?

A. Er, yes. But we did not foresee the resentment of the Sunnis at being ruled by the Shia majority they used to control.

Q: Really? It sounds pretty predictable to me. But leave that for a bit. Can our troops, or the Americans, contain or control this civil war?

A: Actually, no. It’s far too widespread and in many places we’ve already handed over control of the streets to Iraqi militias.

Q: So if our troops cannot stop the civil war, what exactly can they do?

A: Well, what they are mostly doing now is defending their own bases against attack.

Q: So what difference would it make if they left, except that British families would not be suffering the loss of their sons, brothers, and fathers?

A: We can’t possibly leave. That would be completely irresponsible. What would the world think?” ~Peter Hitchens


But Mr. Hitchens doesn’t leave it there. He really drives the dagger home with these lines:

What makes me grind my teeth is that these chancers, who bamboozled two great free nations into a wrong and unjust war, had made almost no plans about what to do once they had won it, and had hardly any idea of what sort of country it was. It is hard to think of anything more irresponsible. How dare they use this word – as they always do – of those of us who opposed the war and call for the withdrawal of troops.

Absolutely. If the supporters of continuing the war really wanted to be “responsible,” they might start by taking some responsibility for creating the God-awful mess that now exists in Iraq. Of course, most will wash their hands of all this massacring and bombing and blame on ubiquitous, vague “fanatics” and “terrorists,” as if letting anarchy loose upon a nation after invading it had nothing to do with the flourishing of these types (nevermind that a fair share of the “fanatics” are theoretically on “our” side).