We find ourselves in a remarkable situation today. Despite a massive propaganda campaign in support of the occupation of Iraq, a clear majority of people in the United States now believes the invasion was not worth the consequences and should never have been undertaken. Likewise, people strongly disapprove of the foreign policy of Republicans and Democrats in Congress, particularly their… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (14)Page 1 of 1 pagesArnove is merely reiterating what many of us in the progressive movement have long understood: That the US imperial venture in Iraq is the failure that it was predisposed to be as are all imperial ventures. Here after three years of brutal occupation where, unlike in the past, there is not even the pretence of nation-building imperial plunder has brought the sharp response that one could reasonably expect. US imperialism has knocked over a hated tyrant after years of supporting him and even once pulling him back from the brink of collapse at the hands of his own people in the aftermath of Gulf War I.
Since the invasion there has been little rebuilding or democratization but much divide and rule tactics that have fostered the sectarian rivalries that have degenerated into a bloody civil war. Arnove is right to sense the US public’s fear of departure despite their opposition to the current war and occupation. Many of the troops themselves have spoken out against the war calling it a sham and recanting their beliefs in their supposed “mission.”
The only reasonable thing the US can do is recognize that no further good can come of this nonsense and leave. Turning the situation over to the UN alone or incombination with some kind of Arab-led interim force headed up by Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and some other Arab allies that the US has spent untold billions to arm and train would be wise. After all, the money spent to cultivate armed and trained Arab allies should be put to some use! Also, a new internationally supervised election should be held that would be seen as legitimate by all Iraqi parties and the rest of the world would help stabilize the situation. From the very start the US occupiers criminalized ALL Sunnis with the CPA’s policy of firing all formerly affiliated Ba’ath Party cops and soldiers despite the US claim that most were forced to join the Party and in order to hold their jobs and be free of Saddamist harrassment. The intension was to isolate the Sunnis in favor of the more pro-US Kurds and Shi’ites despite the immediate effect this had on law and order and security in Baghdad and its environs. The New Consititution which was rammed down Iraq’s throat was to promote the dismemberment of the country so as to ensure US domination as well as cultivate a Shi’ite theocrat that would serve a our puppet as would the head of any Kurdish rump state in the North. The facade of a central governent in Baghdad would keep up appearances as the elected heads of state (two of the most alloof and unpopular figures in Iraqi politics) continued to act a figure heads for US control. Even the 275 member Iraq National Assembly, still bound by the 100 Bremer Orders from the pre-June 2004 hand over of sovereignty, still acts as a rubber stamp for US policy though its own sense of realism continues to press the call for a timetable for US withdrawl. They don’t seemed to have the same bogus US concern about a set date enabling a “terrorist takeover.”
Having exposed the stated reasons for war as a fraud, the anti-war forces both in and out of elected offices, must make the case to the American people this election year of 2006 and take back as much of the legislature as possible. It is the only hope of putting ordinary Americans back on the road to reclaiming their government from the unrepresentitive farce that they now suffer under today.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Mar 19, 2006 at 1:29 AM LIBERALS ARE NOT ONLY STUPID AND IGNORANT, BUT YOU LIBERALS ARE TRAITORS.
YOU LIBERALS WILL BE IN POWER IN THE USA.... WHY?
BECAUSE ..... LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER !!!
LOL… LMAO…
Posted by tina1 on Mar 19, 2006 at 11:58 PM Maybe demonstrators should have signs printed in OMFG ALLKAPS!!!1!11oneone
Posted by Harrower on Mar 20, 2006 at 1:24 PM The important thing isn’t to evaluate the justification for the war, to analyze its outcomes, or to pussyfoot around with debates on staying-the-course v. pulling-out-today. The point is to fight the war and win it. The point is to choose a side, the side you were actually born on when you were born American. Does it matter what we thought we knew back in 2003, or whether we were correct or not? No. What matters is that our Commander in Chief needs our support as he prosecutes this war to a victorious finish, to the benefit of Iraq and the world and to the greater glory of America, the greatest nation ever conceived by the mind of man, the single nation in the history of the planet that is literally incapable of doing anything wrong, foolish, short-sighted, or evil. You’re either with us or against us, and all this chit-chat does is distract us from the sacred mission at hand. To even question the “right-ness” of it all lends aid and comfort to the enemy!
After all, even God is on our side. What the hell’s the matter with you?
..............
Whew! That was rough. This deprogramming my head from stupidity, ignorance, and treason is a hard fuckin’ slog! Feelin’ kinda dizzy…
Darn this mental disorder anyway! It would be so much easier if I could just stick with simplistic understandings and name-calling!
Posted by Kuya on Mar 20, 2006 at 11:34 PM cabdriver,
I certainly agree with your comment:
“...a new internationally supervised election should be held that would be seen as legitimate by all Iraqi parties and the rest of the world would help stabilize the situation.”
Would that it were possible to get these groups to agree on anything. They have been at each other’s throats for centuries — too bad, but true.
There is an interesting view by Christopher Hitchens, Vanity Fair columnist, which is worth noting on this topic.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008120
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 21, 2006 at 3:28 PM I’m not sure that Sunnis and Shi’ites are actually natural or historic enemies as the Bush Administration conveniently portrays them. After the establishment of some of the early Sunni Califates like the Ummyaads in Spain and the Abbysids in Damascus there was peace between the two factions. Certainly, by the time of the Turkish conquest the fighting ceased and the New Califate in Istanbul was respected as the Center of all Islam. In the three provinces of what was to become Iraq, Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra the Sunnis and the Shi’ites got along and there was no sectarian instability anywhere in the Ottoman empire from the early 1500s until the collapse after WWI with the creation of the first modern Turkish Republic. There was a little matter of a Muslim massacre of Christians in the Mount of Lebanon in the 1860s but this was a misguided response to French colonization and intrusion into Lebanon and the consequent weakening of Turkish suzareignity over the area. This was known as the capitulations throughout the 19th century whereby Turkey gave in to British and French demands in parts of the empire. Muslims often saw it in purely religious terms as the more fundamentalist elements do today.
It is obvious that there is little good that the coalition can do anymore and the best thing is international supervision and a new attempt at nation building. Clearly most of the Iraqi people want us to go. They clearly blame us for the conflagration there and understandably so. It is purely delusional to think that this is salvagable and that a stable and prosperous democracy can emerge simply by the US/UK staying the course. This is not about al Quaeda and Zarquawi. There are many different insurgents resisting the occupation and if the US agreed to a negotiated settlement including a withdrawl timetable, powersharing, and recall elections for president and for the drafting of the New Constitution there would be a cease fire and a cessession of violence. The US had no respect for Iraqi sovereignty, or Iraqi rights to control its own indigenous wealth and economy from the start. We tried to privatize everything from the 200 state owned factories, to the banks, port facilities, the state agricultural marketing corporation, and other things that created the much vaunted Iraqi middle class under the Baathists. The oil was left in state hands only to prevent other countries from usurping parts of it! The US behaved like a colonizing outsider especially with the way it went on to establish 14 military bases without Iraqi consent (much like the UK did in the old imperial days) and wanted to use the new Iraq as a basing point for the invasion of other countries in the region.
Enough is enough! This US must cease it imperialist outrages and get on with the business of being a decent world citizen like it expects others to be. I have always thought the world would be much better off if the US was not a superpower and took on the role of a honest broker in world conflict instead of imperial hegemon. It would reduce world tensions and increase stability. It would also help democratic movements around the world if US aggression didn’t legitimate and strengthen the hard line elements in places like Iran, North Korea, and Syria. Using language like Axis of Evil is counter productive. It is a non-starter in peace negotiations.
Finally, the US must learn to work with its own allies. Only in this way can many of the world’s most intractable problems begin to be solved.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Mar 22, 2006 at 12:21 AM There is no Democracy in Iraq?
Must be election time in Iraq again. This nonsensical rhetoric seems to raise its ugly head in America every time the Iraqis do something stupid like voting.
Some people have this crazy notion that if you say something loud enough, the opposing truth can be suppressed.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 22, 2006 at 8:47 AM Mr. Cline,
Just what kind of “democracy” do you think exists in this current bloodbath called Iraq. Does it occur to you that almost none of the preconditions for a LEGITIMATE and FREE and FAIR election ever existed in that country from the time of the US/UK invasion down to the present and that the candidates were so highly vetted by the US military that the entire experience was rendered meaningless. In the case of the 2005 elections for national assembly most of the purple fingered Iraqi voters didn’t even realize what posts the election was for and simply voted hoping to end the violence and bring the occupation to an end and normalcy back to the country. The elections were a farce and their key purpose was to legitimate the occupation and its plunder. Saying that Iraq is now a democracy shows a mentality similar to the one that suddenly declared El Salvador a democracy in the early 1980s because of elections despite the raging civil war and ongoing death squad threats against any but the most reactionary elements like ARENA. I hope that you will look deeply and critically into the currrent situation. You may find results that point to a very different reality than the ones dellusionally portrayed by the Bush Administration.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Mar 22, 2006 at 2:11 PM Cabdriver,
I agree an international supervision would be a plus, but must disagree on a couple of points.
You wrote:
“It is obvious that there is little good that the coalition can do anymore and the best thing is international supervision and a new attempt at nation building. Clearly most of the Iraqi people want us to go.”In my opinion little is obvious about not only Iraq, but concerning the war in general. This (like Vietnam) has become an emotionally changed issue. We seem to be pitting the “My country right or wrong” people against the “My country is always wrong” faction.
Much of this hinges on the past two Presidential elections. I am in a weekly discussion group affiliated wwith The Elder Hostel organization. I repeatedly hear comments, “Like I never watch Fox News.” “He’s a neocon.” “PBS is a liberal dream world.”
I have not been happy with many of this administrations actions, comments or policies. I voted against Gore and Kerry — not FOR Bush. I have to force myself to listen to his speeches and the press conferences are pure agony at times.
BUT — The information we get daily is suspect — I question any and all of it.
I have talked to several of our returning troops. Without exception they are appalled at the news reporting when they come home. They tell of good personal relationships with Iraqis, both civilians and Iraq forces. Two weeks ago I met a young, twice wounded Marine and asked him what the people he had contact with said about our being there. He said, “Yes, they want us to go, but not before they are strong enough to manage their own defense.”
IMO the politicians are repeating the same major mistakes of Nam. Body count is an easy, media oriented BS measure. We need many more troops in order to hold and pacify neighborhoods, cities and eventually the borders. Not to do so creates a situation not unlike the US big city ghetto where inhabitants fear insurgents, informants and the ordinary criminals (which Saddam released into the general population). Not what a politician wants to admit. Bush says the field commanders decide — Yeah, sure. Like I would have done the opposite of what I instinctively knew my CO wanted (and I wasn’t Regular Army).
Yesterday in my discussion group the comment was made that the US has supported dictators in the past including Saddam. I pointed out that this was in an era of “My enemy’s enemy is my friend” an expedient when the Soviets were our biggest perceived threat. Also, when we don’t intercede (as now in the Sudan) we are criticized and when we do as in Iraq — the same happens.
His reply, “We should let people choose their own leaders.”We did that in pre-WW2 Germany and Japan.
I see a lot of evidence that the radical Muslims are willing to overlook their differences and are united in their “anti-infidel” mission. This IS about al Quaeda, Osama, Zarqawi, and all the other branches of this wacky bunch of intolerant religious nuts. It is not about Iraq, Iran, or any nation state. To us a nation contains diverse religious ideas, but these fundamentalists see their religion (only theirs) encompassing diverse nations.
We need to ignore our aversion to individuals and think of our country.
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 23, 2006 at 9:06 AM Correction: Should read “emotionally charged issue” —
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 23, 2006 at 11:13 AM WTH,
The returning military personel hate the media in general and they certainly hate the negative news about Iraq because it seems to define everything in very narrow terms and doesn’t really get to the neglected issue of their positive individual interactions with many of the Iraqi people which does exist. They take the criticism of the war personally and can’t separate the war as an issue with what they as individuals are doing and thinking. This is the problem with politics in general. How to separate out aspects of issues at many different levels and also separate individuals from the actions and policies of their governments. The desire on the part of many service personel to truely believe in what they are doing is very strong--an almost psychological necessity which blinds them from the larger picture. What they don’t realize is that the war is a disaster. Many of these soldiers know very little about what they are doing or the place where they are doing it. It is hard for the individual to see the harm that the entire US military effort is doing in the long run. Also, many are naive about the real intentions of the Bush Administration.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Mar 24, 2006 at 11:18 PM Cabdriver,
I expect much of what you say about the service personnel is so. Yes, Iraq is a mess. If politicians continue as usual it will get worse.
But… we are there and the reasons can be argued (and will be for at least our lifetimes) — the reality is that to leave before there is a reasonable degree of stability and capability for self defense would be criminal.
The democracy goal was/is too ambitious.
When we left Vietnam people were butchered. We said we would help after the 1991 war and tens of thousands we slaughtered. We are ignoring the Sudan and other Africa countries where terrible conditions persist.
We should ask for more European participation apart from the UN. The terrorists are after them too.
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 25, 2006 at 4:35 PM WTH,
People are being slaughtered everyday and some of the killing is by US troops who mistakenly kill innocent people unaware of martial law stipulations like curfew times, when and where to stop for road blocks, or because they unknowingly approach security sensitive sites. Many are often killed in such situations because of their lack of ability to comprehend English. There are reports of tragedies coming out of Iraq daily. The country is in a state of war mostly because of the sectarian violence promoted by US policies or due to resentment caused by the US/UK military presence. The best thing to do is just leave. The EU doesn’t want to do to much under the current circumstances because the see it as a way to assist a US led occupation they detest. I really don’t believe it is due to “sour grapes” because they are left out of the economic benefits of the reconstruction as the conservative US media says. The carpetbagging is a disgrace in and of itself.
I really am very cynical about the capacity of the US government, and in particular this Administration’s ability, to do any good in the world at all. I think it would be great if the US could withdraw completely from world affairs until this gang is out of power. Afterwards we should than limit our involvement to the “honest broker” role and only as part of multi-lateral efforts. We have so far been to self interested.
The American People are often unaware of the reality of the US role in world affairs. It is mistakenly thought, for example, that fully 25% of our Federal Budget (some even think GDP) is committed to foreign assistance. This would be about $650 billion out of a nearly two and one half trillion dollar budget. How absurd! The real figure is closer to about one quarter of one percent of our entire GDP or 1% of the entire federal budget. Many countries give much greater shares of their economy as foreign aid including the much maligned Gulf Oil States whose high oil prices are often blamed for much global economic malaise!
Much of US foreign assistance is either military or food aid. Even in this case the aid doesn’t come as a blank check but as tied aid which helps our economy. The export/import bank and various US Agencies give credits to purchase US products. Much of the food aid is geared toward developing US agricultural markets at the expense of local farmers. Iraq is a good example. Once completely self sufficient in a variety of grains, Iraq became over 80% dependant on US grain imports by the time of the invasion of Kuwait in 1990. By that point about $5 billion dollars worth of agricultural credits had been granted to the Ba’athist Regime by the USDA. The military aid is on behalf of the US defense industries. Once the heavy weapons systems come to comprise the bulk of a foreign country’s defense system, they become steady customers for replacements of US weapons and spare parts in the future. Most of the global arms trade, annually worth tens of billions of dollars, is based on US weapons and weapons manufacturers who sometimes allow foreign countries to build US patented weapons systems under license with US Defense Department approval. Many sophisticated US weapons programs are developed with export markets in mind. Over 50% of the nearly 4,500 F-16 fighter aircraft manufactured since 1978 has been for export.
US hegemony has harmed both the American people and many abroad. A new government with humane priorities like peace, democracy, and the meeting of basic human needs would lead to greater global stability and well being.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Mar 26, 2006 at 12:59 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Anthony Arnove
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
