QUOTE
What's an inversion Mommy?
Ha! Okay, sweetie, let me just fasten your bib and then I will tell you a tale of Yoda-speak. Love I you.
Inverted speech is simply backwards-talking. It is common in ye olde verse because people actually talked thataway, but today it generally signals a lazy poet twisting syntax to achieve a convenient rhyme. That is clearly not the case here, because you could just as easily have said, "We'll give Iraq democracy" without disturbing your rhyme scheme, so I'm guessing you were aiming for a loftier tone with it. I have seen instances where inversion is used to good effect, but this is not one of them. It is a specialized tool that should come out of the box only rarely into the hands of a highly trained technician.
Quoting
Judie Peet, a dearly beloved departed poet friend known to some here for her passion and unfailing patience in mentoring budding poets, "There is
always another way to say a thing." There is much to be gleaned from her archived challenge threads, even yet.
You found another way in S1 to the improvement of the poem. I suggest you move S1/L3's "that" and the couplet's "of" to the lines below, and rethink all those hyphens. I'm a little bothered by the image of them hiding
beneath the wreaths -- behind, maybe, but then you must choose whether to sacrifice sense for sound. Would you consider "blood-soaked blooms" for alliteration as well as meter?
I'm reassured by your return to this, as I was wondering if my critique was too blunt.
Mary