A.J.: America Must Stay in Iraq
Filed under: Iraq, Middle East — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on February 29, 2008 @ 2:20 pm CET
Angelina Jolie wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post about the war in Iraq. It’s actually quite a good read. She basically calls on the US to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes. “My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we not only have a moral obligation to help displaced Iraqi families, but also a serious, long-term, national security interest in ending this crisis,” she writes.
She spends a lot of time describing the situation, not from a military perspective but from a humanitarian one. As it is, four million Iraqis are living in other countries. They have fled. They’re now refugees in Jordan and / or Syria. And their families want them to come home.
But in order for them to come back home, a lot of work needs to be done. In this regard Jolie writes:
Today’s humanitarian crisis in Iraq — and the potential consequences for our national security — are great. Can the United States afford to gamble that 4 million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of Middle East, won’t explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder?
What we cannot afford, in my view, is to squander the progress that has been made. In fact, we should step up our financial and material assistance. UNHCR has appealed for $261 million this year to provide for refugees and internally displaced persons. That is not a small amount of money — but it is less than the U.S. spends each day to fight the war in Iraq. I would like to call on each of the presidential candidates and congressional leaders to announce a comprehensive refugee plan with a specific timeline and budget as part of their Iraq strategy.
She also addresses the question of whether the surge is working:
As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs. And when I asked the troops if they wanted to go home as soon as possible, they said that they miss home but feel invested in Iraq. They have lost many friends and want to be a part of the humanitarian progress they now feel is possible.
Hear, hear.
As an aside, I realize that quite some people don’t take Jolie seriously, considering she’s an actress and all that, but her being an actress doesn’t mean that she’s not intelligent and / or doesn’t know what she’s talking about. In fact, I respect her greatly for her work for the UNHCR, and I have the feeling she has more knowledge than most self-declared experts. At least when it comes to humanitarian issues.
And no, I’m not just saying that because I mostly agree with her.
1 Angelina Jolie » A.J.: America Must Stay in Iraq [PoliGazette]
February 29, 2008 @ 3:19 pm CET[…] INFORMACION.es wrote an interesting post today on A.J.: America Must Stay in Iraq [PoliGazette]Here’s a quick excerptAngelina Jolie wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post about the war in Iraq. It’s actually quite a good read. […]
2 sashal
February 29, 2008 @ 4:58 pm CETI hope she will also chip in the considerable amount of money:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/02/three-trillion.html
3 Michael van der Galien
February 29, 2008 @ 5:00 pm CETSashal, I read somewhere she donated $25 million herself.
As an aside, the US people have the responsibility to spend bigtime on Iraq. That’s the responsibility you get when you invade another country. Yeah, you can’t use the money - then - to make the government bigger domestically and to start all kinds of nice projects, but responsibility is like that, isn’t it?
4 sashal
February 29, 2008 @ 5:18 pm CETwell, morally I will agree with you, we should fix what we have destroyed… at least
5 Bob
February 29, 2008 @ 5:32 pm CETQuite interesting. For me I have been one of the few that was against us going in but once we did I realized that, you can’t fixate on why we went in forever (maybe later after the dust settles or to get people who made the wrong decisions out) but have to deal with what the problems are now. It’s a mess we created but the humanitarian mess we would leave from total withdraw has never been the right answer. So for my part I get called a warmonger even though I was never for it but can still see the need for us to stay.
6 Rudi666
February 29, 2008 @ 6:36 pm CETAJ is doing some good in the world, but why the importance of her comments. I wonder what Lindsay Lohan and Jessica Simpson have to say about Iraq? What is Paris Motel…
7 Michael van der Galien
February 29, 2008 @ 6:43 pm CETYou know, those kind of comments anger me. Seriously. The comparison is way off.
I share your disrespect for Hilton and Lohan and Simpson, but show some respect for Jolie. I think she earned it, no?
8 Rudi666
February 29, 2008 @ 6:59 pm CETMy first sentence acknowledges what she is doing. What she and Brad Pitt are doing in New Orleans is even more important. They have a home there and donated quite a sum of money to local efforts. IMO - But few here at this site see any importance in the works of the UN and AJ.
9 C Stanley
February 29, 2008 @ 6:59 pm CETSome celebs do earn some credibility, and Jolie is one of them. Comparisons should be to Diana on landmines and AIDS, Audrey Hepburn on children and poverty, Mary Tyler Moore on juvenile diabetes, Lance Armstrong on cancer, etc.
Some celebs like to posture and fancy themselves as more important or intelligent than they really are, or they join the latest fad of public opinion; others earn some measure of respect by actually lending their name to a cause and becoming involved enough to have some understanding of it. I’d definitely put Jolie in that category- from her writings, it’s apparent that she’s been blessed with intelligence as well as beauty. Doesn’t necessarily mean she’s Nobel Laureate material, but she has some heft behind her opinions.
10 Rudi666
February 29, 2008 @ 7:09 pm CETIn the CNN interview and the op-ed her concern over the Iraq refugees in other countries and displaced within Iraq. She takes great measures to avoid any comments on the war, her concerns are humanitarian not geo-political.
11 C Stanley
February 29, 2008 @ 7:26 pm CETGee, Rudi, I must have imagined that she did comment on the war here:
And here:
She’s obviously not going out on a limb to pontificate about military strategy or to politicize the issue (her credibility would crumble if she did), but she DID express geopolitical concerns there because the humanitarian needs and the geopolitical are closely related.
12 Rudi666
February 29, 2008 @ 8:24 pm CETPreviously AJ did come out against the war. The CNN interviews only address the refugee crisis. The main focus of her op-ed is the refugees, the surge angle addresses the security for humanitarian work and nothing to do with Iraqis or US politics.
From the CNN interview:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/02/07/iraq.jolie/#cnnSTCVideo
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/02/07/jolie.transcript/index.html
Her recent statements are neither pro-war or anti-war, she’s addressing a humanitarian crisis in the ME and Iraq. For either side to cherry pick her statements to support their side is a joke.
13 Iraq » AJ: America Must Stay in Iraq
March 1, 2008 @ 5:21 am CET[…] Michael van der Galien wrote an interesting post today on AJ: America Must Stay in IraqHere’s a quick excerptAngelina Jolie wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post about the war in Iraq. It’s actually quite a good read. She basically calls on the US to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes. “My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we … […]