Iraq: A Hobsons Choice
May 24, 2007 by John Allen · Leave a Comment
Iraq: A Hobson's Choice
Cut and Run, Surge, Re-Instate the Draft, Do We Have a Choice?
by Lee William Sachs, U.S. Army Veteran
There are many Americans today, teetering on the precipice of menopause and even beyond, who draw the historical corollary of Iraq to Vietnam. Of course, there are similarities, but ironically, more differences. So as not to forge on intermittently, let´s focus on the most important and leave the rest for this author´s next installment.
During the Vietnam War, fathers and sons and brothers et al were pitted against one another, so vociferously that many draft-agers avoiders and dodgers fled our yankee country, demonstrated with rocks and fecal material, and tore the very soul of this great nation asunder to an extent not seen since the Civil War. Our Civil War. Not so with Iraq.
Here, pardon the pun, the Iraqi Civil War has indeed made strange bedfellows. There is no precedence in our 230+year history in which yellow dog democrats have bonded with the most reactionary of right-wing republicans, and even pacifists, those once closet sissies have split almost 50-50 on the basic issue at hand.
Do we continue on with this military misadventure, throwing more cannon fodder into a territory that neither wants us, respects us, and within their own borders can´t even agree what to order for lunch (pig products notwithstanding)? So herein lies the proverbial Hobson´s Choice:
|
HOBSONS CHOICE Hobson's choice is an apparently free choice which is really no choice at all. The phrase is said to originate from Thomas Hobson (1544–1630), a livery stable owner at Cambridge, England who, in order to rotate the use of his horses, offered customers the choice of either taking the horse in the stall nearest the door—or taking none at all. Thomas Hobson (1544–1 January 1631 [1]), sometimes called "The Cambridge Carrier," is best known as the name behind the expression Hobson's choice. A carrier from Cambridge, England, Hobson delivered mail between London and Cambridge, operating a livery stable outside the gates of St Catharine's College. When they were not needed to deliver mail, Hobson's horses were rented to students and academic staff of the university. Hobson soon discovered that his best (and fastest) horses were the most popular, and overworked. To prevent further exhaustion of his best horses, Hobson devised a strict rotation system, only allowing customers to rent the next horse in line. His policy, "this one or none," has come to be known as "Hobson's choice," when an apparent choice is in fact no choice at all. The term originated in the mid-seventeenth century. [2] The first known written usage of this phrase is in Joseph Addison's paper The Spectator (October 14, 1712), though it also appears in Thomas Ward's 1688 poem "England's Reformation", not published until after Ward's death. Ward wrote, "Where to elect there is but one, 'tis Hobson's choice—take that, or none." Charlotte Perkins Gilman uses the phrase in her novel "Herland". Hobson's choice is different from a Catch-22 situation, where both (or all) choices available actually cancel each other out. |
Choice # 1
The Surge
We continue this Bush 20,000 man division token surge, bubkis in terms of the daunting job at hand, and suffer further casualties, especially the citizen soldiers, having no place there from the git-go. Do we send in the requisite 250,000 soldiers which unarguably would be sufficient manpower to quell the rioting ragheads of religious ridiculousness?
And where would we find this necessary "surge" force to get the job done? From the Asian, European, sub-Continent or even Latin American theaters (yes, we are outsourcing to our heart´s content in Colombia, nose capitol of Latin America). This manpower does not exist! So then, another Hobson´s Choice: Reinstate the Draft.
Choice # 2
Cut and Run
Hobson #2 dictates we cut and run. The troops simply mount their metaphorical hobson horses (armored Calvary in this instance) and ride outta Dodge. Of course, there will be some casualties in a strategical redeployment — a euphemism for retreat — but the United States and the Coalition of Coerced Countries could effectuate evacuation in a relatively orderly and money-saving manner. Then, the denouement is self-evident, a self-evident prophesy.
We lose collective Face, but no longer a collection of lives and limbs. Let the Shites and Sunnis and freelance malcontents and agent provocateurs slaughter the holy hell out of themselves, with one saving grace. If you believe the b.s. blurted from the bully pulpits of the mullahs, there would be mucho dead insurgents having a field day with all those 60 almond-eyed virgins that — admit it — inhabit all our dreams.
As an observant Jew, this writer obviously would file his brief for number two, though admittedly still no viable choice, either now or in the retrospect of heavenly virgin assignations. In essence, we are damned if we do, damned if we don´t.
The arguments ensue ad infinitum, ad nauseum, every politico and pseudo-fox intellectual on the Final Solution. And there is none. From the salons of the upper east side of Manhattan to the expatriate shores of Mexico´s Lake Chapala, a well spring of geriatric warriors from WWII, Korea, Vietnam and beyond, they argue and debate on and on and on and on. And in the final analysis, it all boils down to a Hobson´s Choice.
THERE IS NO CHOICE AT ALL!
About the Author: Lee William Sachs is a U.S Army Veteran (Vietnam). He has a Masters in Journalism from Seattle University. He is currently retired and living in Mexico where he writes fiction novels. He can be reached at leesachs@yahoo.com
