By William C. Shelton

(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville News belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville News, its staff or publishers.)

The Iraq invasion’s fifth anniversary has understandably prompted widespread commentary. Its consequences are felt in Somerville through concerns for absent and suffering community members, sometimes-divisive arguments, constrained fiscal choices, and increasing economic hardship. So I’ll add my modest insights to those of the pundits.

For me, the most important lesson is one that our nation should have learned many times since 1898. Our nation’s political leaders do not understand the complexity of any other peoples’ experience, and they don’t have the humility needed to acquire that understanding. The best military leaders have learned this from experience, but they must follow the chain of command.

The political leaders ignore rich evidence in favor of their cartoonish view of the world. They imagine that application of superior force will transform that cartoon into reality. Their lethal combination of stupendous arrogance with breathtaking ignorance virtually always makes the situation worse. Here are but a few examples:

A U.S.-engineered a coup overthrew the enormously popular Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh in 1953. The U.S.-backed Reza Pahlavi’s brutal repression of all political opposition led directly to the 1979 Islamic revolution. To provide a regional counterbalance to Iran’s new power, the U.S. government increased the power of Saddam Hussein with arms, money, and council.

In 1954, the CIA overthrew democratically elected Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz. U.S.-supported right-wing elements created death squads in the late 1960s. When a Guatemalan genocide of indigenous peoples in the 1970s and 80s expanded popular resistance, the U.S. backed the government.

Among the causes of the Congolese civil war, in which child soldiers and gang rape have been prominent features, is the 1960 CIA-backed overthrow of the Congo’s first democratically elected president.

A 1973 U.S.-backed military coup overthrew democratically elected Chilean President Salvador Allende. The U.S.’s ‚Äúallies‚Äù tortured and murdered thousands, and their policies produced widespread economic hardship. Chile now has a Socialist president.

During the war in Viet Nam, Cambodia’s Prince Sihanouk kept his country neutral. Outraged that Vietnamese revolutionaries were transporting material through Cambodian jungles, the CIA supported a 1970 coup. General Lon Nol’s (whose name spelled backwards is Lon Nol) overthrow of the traditional monarchy legitimated the Khmer Rouge, who ultimately slaughtered 2 million Cambodians.

Ronald Reagan deployed Marines to Lebanon with no discernable plan. When, in September 1983, a suicide bomber killed 241 Marines, Reagan muted public outcry by invading the tiny nation of Granada and overthrowing its democratically elected government.

And of course, the ultimate consequences of the U.S.’s blocking the Geneva Agreements’ implementation and 1956 elections in Viet Nam are felt to this day. With each incident, our nation’s respect in the world decreases, and our enemies increase.

Costs of the current orgy of hubris already make it the second-most expensive war in our history. Unlike previous wars, the only people asked to sacrifice have been combatants and their families. The 40,000 maimed and wounded are still fewer than those with hidden injuries that will deform their lives and those of their loved ones. The rest of us are encouraged to serve by increasing consumption.

Donald Rumsfeld estimated the war’s cost at $50 to $60 billion. Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz now conservatively estimates that it will cost 60 times that amount, or $3 trillion. That number is hard to grasp. The Social Security crisis would be solved for 50 years with $1 trillion.

Because of war costs’ economic impact, the Fed flooded the economy with credit. Regulators looked the other way. The credit crisis played an important role in our slide into recession. Blank-check war funding and huge tax cuts for the wealthy will dim our kids’ futures for at least two generations.

The U.S. has fewer friends in the world than ever before. Millions pray fervently for our death. Our nation is deeply divided, while the challenges facing us are greater than any time since World War II.

Six years ago, when no intelligence agency could find evidence to support an invasion, Cheney and Rumsfeld, created the Office of Special Projects. Its Deputy Director Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski later described it as a ‚Äúpropaganda shop.‚Äù Its bogus ‚Äúintelligence‚Äù became the war’s justification. Yet, the truth was available to all who voted to authorize the war, including Senators now running for president.

Having been grimly steeped in the post-1898 history described above, I anticipated the war’s consequences. Still, for the first two years, I thought the consequences of withdrawing would be worse than those of staying. And I was influenced by deployed acquaintances who fervently want to make things better there.

I am now convinced that Iraq’s considerable problems can only be worsened by the U.S. occupation. During the Viet Nam War, sincerely ignorant hawks argued that our withdrawal would bring a blood bath. It didn’t. The bloodbath happened in Cambodia. But I believe that a bloodbath is inevitable in Iraq, and staying only prolongs it and increases its magnitude.

The Democrats who gained control of the Congress were elected to end the war. They have betrayed that commitment to accomplish their own political ends. The war goes on.

It would take a couple of more columns to present all the evidence that the ‚Äúsurge‚Äù is not working. But a Washington Post quote from an administration official in response to last week’s eruption of violence makes the point nicely: ‚ÄúWe can’t quite decipher what is going on. It’s a question of who’s got the best conspiracy theory.‚Äù