So if we look at what would lead Bush to proclaim mission accomplished in May 2003 we see he was telling the truth.. as he saw it.
- Saddam's regime was and is in fact disposed. Iraq is in such dire straights that it will be decades or centuries before we (the US and Israel) are in danger of WMD attacks from the soil of Iraq.
- America has secured future access to known oil reserves. Is the price of gas high enough yet to justify our military action that secured for the US the largest known oil reserves behind Saudi Arabia? Well, when the price is near $6 per gallon this fall and Americans still demand to drive what, when and how they want, more people will wake up to the benefit of war for oil. Morals go out the window in America once the pocket books are affected.
- Remember the Axis of Evil speech? Nothing secret or classified about the State of the Union address where Bush told everyone, EVERYONE, exactly what his intentions were. The media clouds our military success in defeating the ruling powers of sovereign nations in Afghanistan and Iraq with an idealistic, and uniquely American, version of mission success. The objective and fact is that US forces are freely mobile on either side of the big target for any American alive during the Regan era: Iran.
An easy mistake for any God loving Christian to make is to think that the people of Iraq or Afghanistan have anything to do with what America calls mission success. Just as support for American forces has been defined as slapping a magnet on the back of your car to profess support rather than actively participate in the democratic process and demand accountability, the fate of the people of the countries America invades and ruins are of no consequence.
I was patrolling in Baghdad when bush said to the world that "we are fighting the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them over here." That sounds great from your soft couch in small town USA but look the people of that nation in the eye while it is being said and you understand that it really means "your lives mean less than ours." So long as it is Iraqi kids caught in the crossfire and left with no hope for a future then America says that is OK.
There modern marvel of mass media is in its ability to cloud an issue with emotion and divert the audience from and type of decision making process. The lines used by Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney (insert every member of the establishment's name here ____ ) that brought ideals of nobility, freedom, justice and righteousness to the cause in Afghanistan or Iraq were smoke to stop Americans from thinking. Bush never lied about his intentions for war, to destroy the Axis of Evil, people just lost the reality of that message when they let mass media divert attention to lesser issues.
In the long run does America care if Iraq is a democracy? Our relations with the Saudis indicates the answer is no. Are liberties and rights for Iraqis a concern of our occupation forces? The subjugation of Iraqi security and protection to that of the American forces also says no. We took over their country and were responsible for law and order but we barely had enough forces to keep our own patrols safe from harm. We still have no ability to extend and form of 24/7 universal security to the general population of Iraq or Afghanistan. The needs of the Iraqis have always been second to that of the Americans in Iraq.
So is Iraq a success? Saddam, that secular dictator who did what America asked of him in a land of Muslim extremists, is gone and dead. America has occupied ground and had more success in Afghanistan than the Soviets ever enjoyed (if the significance of that is lost to you read Ghost Wars by Coll). The Us military machine is poised to strike as deep as ever historically possible into the heart of the Persian Empire.
So what if the infrastructure of the countries are a mess? Not a problem for the average American forced to contemplate changing their lifestyle to put gas in their car for the first time since 1973 when we missed out on our first wake up call. "Our forces are bogged down in a quagmire and unable to take on the next challenge (Iran)" only if you don;t think we couldn't cut our losses and just move on (remember that we don't care or feel responsible for the fate of the people).
What's the big deal about Iran? Well, a few years back they decided they didn't like the government imposed by the US (a terrible fate for many Central American countries as well) so they booted him and took a bunch of our boys and girls hostage. Nothing will piss and American off more than the idea of one of our own being held against their will and possibly tortured (answers why Muslims are so emotional about Gitmo and Abu Gharib doesn't it?). So for their defiance of American will for 30 years it is time Iran be taught a lesson. And they threaten our 51st state: Israel. And they also sit on very under developed oil reserves that our oil man rulers would just love to write the development contracts for (as we are now doing in Iraq).
Saddam did most everything we asked (the stuff he didn't comply on was just a show to his neighbors that he wasn't a total puss) and that got him the business end of the noose. The Taliban is the product of US money funneled through the Pakistani ISI in the post Soviet Afghanistan and just about a decade later we return the favor of post Soviet stability with our boys invading and killing the Army we trained and created. Except that they are true believers and are just as hard for us to destroy as they were for the Soviets, Doh!
Iraq is a done deal if you look at the objectives and outcomes (not ideals and fantasy). The ensuing chaos is what the military-industrial complex calls "job security" so why should anyone speed up bringing this thing to a close while Uncle Sam has his pocketbook open and writing blank checks?
So long as soldiers sign up voluntarily and America continues to sleep at the wheel this thing will in fact go on forever as the ONLY thing that has defined defeat is the US leaving Iraq.

1 comment:
I absolutely agree. I've argued the same points, myself, and its good to see that others can see.
The first mistake we made was disbanding the Iraqi army. Many of those soldiers are fighting us right now because they have nothing else that they can do.
If we had not done that, we could have them patrolling the streets.
Otherwise we should not have soldiers playing the role that they are. Soldiers are trained to kill, to destroy. There's nothing wrong with that, but patrolling and peacekeeping is for cops and MPs, not soldiers.
If you have time, please check this out:
http://westernfrontosterhout.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment