I like the idea that I'm not the only outspoken evil lib'rul in town.
Last week on this page a gentleman named Rick Straub wrote an excellent essay that touched on what we might call the evangelical impulse inherent in our occupation of Iraq. It was itself a response to a column that appeared in this newspaper about how both soldiers and pastors, people of faith, are putting that faith into action and improving the lives of ordinary Iraqis.
By anyone's definition that's a wonderful thing. But Straub wrote that while he considers himself a "person of faith," he feels no need to go save Iraqi souls — especially at the barrel of a gun.
And here we crash up against one of those assumptions that has undergirded not just our war in Iraq, but our entire foreign policy these past six years. For the evangelical impulse isn't merely confined to religious faith. Our wars in the Mideast are being waged not merely to save Arab souls, but Arabs themselves.
Freedom, American-style, is the prescription for what ails this part of the world. If only they could be more like us! For if they
were more like us, they wouldn't make war
against us. But more than that; their lives would be better, both spiritually and materially. Out from under the yoke of tyranny, they would be safer and happier and more prosperous. Save for the architecture, religious heritage and ethnicity, Baghdad might come to resemble Boston; Tehran, Tucson. Then maybe we could all join hands and sing "Kumbaya."
For this, we're told, is the only way to wipe out terrorism. "Freedom"
must be exported at the barrel of a gun; we have no choice.
Too bad it's a pipe dream.
We are not going to remake the world in our image. OK? The cost is going to be too great, even for the mighty U.S. Already the war in Iraq has dragged on longer than even the most pessimistic pundits predicted; reports out last week noted that it's cost every single American $20,000, and the meter's running. And this doesn't even begin to touch on the human costs, ours — and theirs.
Beyond this, how narcissistic of us to believe we can march into societies that in some cases trace their lineage back thousands of years, and believe we're going to replace it with this wonderful new American version. Do the people want it? Of course they do! But even if they don't, who cares? This is the new white man's burden. This is social engineering. This is utopianism.
And that utopianism, make no mistake, provides excellent cover for those who would "evangelize" the Mideast for their own purposes. That would be oil; that would be why our embassy in Baghdad is the biggest ever built; that would be why we're building permanent military bases in Iraq. That will be the underlying rationale for our eventual attack on Iran — which is coming and coming soon, as it must.
Ah, but it's so much better when we can feel good about these things! Let us inspire the people with noble ideals! And many who fight are
indeed inspired by these noble ideals. But on the national level, our purpose is more pragmatic, more grasping. And we obscure it by marveling at how neatly our economic interests parallel the needs of the Arab soul.
The great disillusionment of these past six years has been that what we saw as the promise inherent in this evangelical impulse has not come to pass. But it was never going to come to pass; our mistake was believing in utopia in the first place. Now it is time for a stiff dose of reality. Christians may have a responsibility to evangelize the globe, but the United States does not.
It's not that I don't care about the poor oppressed Arabs.
It's that I care about Americans first.
Gil Smart is associate editor of the Sunday News. E-mail him at gsmart@lnpnews.com, or phone 291-8817. 
