LIKE MANY AMERICANS, I’ve become somewhat apathetic about the war in Iraq. The conflict has dragged on for so long that I’ve lost interest and become more focused on domestic issues such as the depressed economy, high unemployment and the healthcare crisis.
Really, I’m almost ashamed to admit that indifference given I am the daughter of a Korean War veteran and the sister-in-law of two full-time Air Force men, one of whom is currently on his second tour of duty in Iraq. But days, even weeks, pass by when I don’t think much at all about those still serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. I’m just being honest here and I’m not proud of myself.
Yet, with the recent deadline for withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq, I took note and wondered exactly how my deployed Air Force brother-in-law feels about the situation.
I e-mailed a list of questions and, as I expected, my relative provided some thoughtful insights from his current home at Joint Base Balad. He emphasized that his comments are solely his and not representative of the U.S. military or the U.S. government.
From his perspective, my brother-in-law seems unimpressed with the big to-do about the “last combat brigades” exiting Iraq. He writes:
To call what used to be “combat brigades” by the new “advise and assist brigades” moniker is like calling a potato a spud. Spin it any way you want, there has been no real change to the mission. Officially, we’re providing training and support to the Iraqi security forces and police. We no longer lead any offensive missions. That’s pretty much what we’ve been doing for quite some time now!
For him personally, the ongoing draw-down means that as Air Force personnel rotate out of his Iraq assignment, they won’t be replaced at the same level. He’s slated to return to the Midwest in early December.
Next, I asked, “How do you define the results of the U.S. action in Iraq?”
He terms the “democratically” elected government as “very shaky” and “extremely ineffectual” since the elections last March.
One of the problems right now is that a lot of different factions are trying to undermine this fragile government by launching numerous attacks upon the security forces, the police, and even the common citizens. I guess the thought is that the government will not be supported if they can’t even provide for the safety of their own people! Who will be the winner in this mess? Only time will tell.
Whether a prevailing attitude among soldiers or not, my military brother-in-law says he never thought the U.S. could “solve” any problems in Iraq. Rather, he hopes that, as a result of the U.S. mission, life will be better for most people there. However, he adds:
We’ll have to wait around for 20 or 30 years to see how it plays out.
Additionally, he shares this take on Iraq’s future. (Maybe his opinion is nothing new, but I find it interesting.)
I have a personal opinion that Iran will have a great deal of influence in the (Iraqi) government because they are the neighbors and because of a common religion with the majority of Iraqis. China will gain a lot of economic advantages in the oil fields. U.S. companies aren’t investing here because the safety of their workers and security of their equipment and infrastructure cannot be guaranteed. China doesn’t worry about these problems and already has some leases in place; reportedly, they have gotten some real bargains too.
Those comments about China remind me of something my father, who fought on the front lines during the Korean Conflict, once told me. The Chinese, he said, would send 8 to 12-year-old boys out ahead of the troops into the battlefield. At the front of the line, those youth would be the first to fall, exactly as the Chinese soldiers intended. The Chinese main force would then rush into battle, over the nearly dead, screaming boys.
So my brother-in-law’s conclusion that “China doesn’t worry about these problems” touched a nerve with me. Given that observation, it would appear to me that attitudes have changed little in the 57 years since the Korean War ended. Maybe not a fair assumption, but…
China doesn’t worry about these problems….
That scares me.
© Copyright 2010 Audrey Kletscher Helbling
Minnesota Prairie Roots 
From words on a government website to soybean markets & a crisis in rural America October 15, 2025
Tags: agriculture, America, China, commentary, farm crisis, farming, messaging, opinion, rural America, rural Minnesota, soybean market, soybeans, tariffs, trade war, United State Department of Agriculture
WHEN I FIRST READ the message bannering the United States Department of Agriculture website during the current government shutdown, my jaw dropped. In a two-sentence statement, “The Radical Left Democrats” are blamed for the closure of the federal government. How unprofessional, I thought, to so blatantly put politics out there on a website designed to help America’s farmers. But then again, why should this surprise me?
United States Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is doing the same in a video message blaming Democrats for the shutdown. She expects this to be broadcast in airport terminals. Many are opting not to air her clearly political statement. And they shouldn’t. It’s unprofessional and wrong in more ways than I can list, no matter what your political affiliation may be.
But back to that message on the USDA website. It goes on to say that President Donald Trump wants to keep the government open “and support those who feed, fuel and clothe the American people.” Now that is certainly a noble statement at face value, one we could all applaud. Who doesn’t want to support our farmers? But in the context of what the President has done to farmers, the statement seems laughable.
Here in the heartland, farmers have lost a major market for soybeans, my state’s top agricultural export. China has stopped buying soybeans from not only Minnesota, but America. That’s billions of dollars in lost income. And all because of the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China, begun by the man who slapped tariffs—now averaging 58 percent—on Chinese imports with a threat to increase that to 100 percent. I’m no economist. But even I understand China’s retaliatory tariffs and actions to tap other markets for soybeans. They went to Brazil and Argentina.
And now President Trump proposes sending $20 billion in aid to Argentina, all tied to an upcoming election there. Why would we bail out a country exporting their soybeans to China while our own financially-strapped farmers are suffering because they’ve lost a key market? This makes no sense to me. Again, I’m not an economist or a politician, simply an ordinary American citizen, with a farm upbringing (and who decades ago freelanced for the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association), questioning the logic of any of this.
Even without the Argentinian component tossed into the mix, there’s more. President Trump has proposed an aid package for farmers to help them get through the financial crisis he created via his tariffs and the resulting trade war with China. That aid would come from the money collected from tariffs. Now I know farmers—my dad was one—are fiercely independent and would rather have a market for their cash crops than government aid. If not for the tariffs…
As the harvest continues here in Minnesota, I can’t help but feel for those who work the land, who continue to face so many uncertainties, financial challenges and stressors. Interest rates on loans remain high. Market prices remain low. Land rents continue to rise. Equipment and other costs are high. And on and on, including the loss of the long-standing soybean export market to China, which quite likely may never be reclaimed.
This is becoming a crisis situation for farmers—those who feed, fuel and clothe Americans. From fields to small town Main Street, rural America is hurting. And politically-biased blame words published on a government website aren’t helping.
© Copyright 2025 Audrey Kletscher Helbling