| Friday,
November 7, 2003 Iraq and National Greatness
Several of us were wondering last night how we got into this mess.
First we had 911, and then Afghanistan which was a very appropriate
response. We pretty well eliminated al Qaeda, chased bin Laden into the
hills, and demonstrated that any regime that harbored our enemies was going
to get a visit from the Special Forces and a rapid regime change. It was
successful and appropriate.
So how did we get into Iraq where Saddam was not a nice guy, but sure
wasn't any threat to the US? He had been deterred. There is still no
convincing evidence that Iraqi agents aided or abetted the 911 plotters, or
were involved in the Cole incident, or otherwise were involved in direct
attacks on the US.
As near as I can tell, somewhere after 911, the "National Greatness"
neo-conservatives, particularly the Weekly Standard crowd, managed to
convince the President and his advisors that they were the true
conservatives, and spoke to the best interests of the conservative wing of
the Republican Party. How they did that is not known to me, but I guess I
see some traces.
To begin with, they were persuasive for a while. A lot of people of
conservative instincts read the Weekly Standard, liked what they saw, and
had no time for deep thought on the subject. They had livings to make and
children to raise. And I was myself an enthusiast for a while. Parts of the
magazine are still very well done.
There were some odd warning signs. Aesthetics reviews by Thomas Disch,
who I last encountered writing condemnations of my work for The Nation,
including a 4 page review of Janissaries that showed in the review that he
had not read past page 30 of the book: yet he wrote this very large review
condemning what is, after all, mostly an action adventure story. For The
Nation. Naturally neither Disch nor The Nation replied to my letters
pointing out that the reviewer could not possibly have read the book he was
condemning. Now Disch appears regularly in The Weekly Standard, his long
service to The Nation and its readership apparently forgotten.
And Weekly Standard argues for National Greatness, which they conceive in
ways that would be familiar to the Emperor Augustus. To Protect the Weak and
Make Humble the Strong. Freedom Follows The Flag, These Colors Don't Run,
and up the empire!
By the time the more traditional 'republican' conservatives (meaning
those of us who opt for a republic, not an empire, and who think National
Greatness is more to be achieved by expeditions to the Moon and Mars, and
ending energy dependence, and providing good decent middle class life for
our citizens rather than trying to export jobs to all the world and level
the entire global playing field) realized what was happening it was a bit
late.
And there was some razzle dazzle. Saddam was represented as having all
these weapons just poised to be used in the Middle East. Conjure up pictures
of nerve gas attacks on Tel Aviv. Did the anthrax attacks that accompanied
911 originate with weaponized anthrax from Iraq? There were lots of hints,
and more than hints, that this was so.
And the invasion was on. One problem was that some of those opposed to
the war really thought it would go badly, that we would leave a lot of
troopers dead. I didn't. I had thought Gulf War I under Bush I would go
worse than it did (I figured about 1,000 casualties) but by Gulf War II it
was pretty clear that it would be a cakewalk at first. And that was
euphoric, and the neo-conservatives really came into their own, and National
Review had Frum read out of the conservative movement all those who didn't
enthusiastically support the war.
And then came the neo-conservative articles about "big government
conservatism". I translate that as empire, and it scares the liver out of
me. But that seems to be where they are now.
So: the question is, what do we do now? We're in Iraq. To just "declare
victory and leave" -- i.e. cut and run -- would leave the area in a mess and
us worse off than before we went in. (Not to mention the Iraqis, who would
be in a state of anarchy and civil war.) We can't justify the invasion of Iraq
on the grounds of eliminating a threat to us because Saddam was desperately
trying NOT to be a threat to us while maintaining his blustery importance in
his region. We can't justify it on the grounds of an orderly regime change
because that is not the way we went in there, and was not the basis of our
negotiations with their army and leadership.
("Soldiers of Iraq: we have determined Saddam Hussein and his sons, and
the following others, to be reasonably suspected of war crimes; they will be
apprehended and tried. Prepare for an orderly transition of government in
the absence of these named individuals. Turn them over to us and our
invasion will cease. Otherwise we will come and take them.)
We did not do that. We went in to conquer the country.
We went in for the wrong reasons. Now that we are there, what reasons do
we have for staying? What do we want to accomplish?
None of this is increasing our National Greatness, and I certainly can
think of things to do with $87 billion that would be more useful to mankind,
our descendents, and our National Greatness than simply occupying Iraq.
That's my analysis, anyway.
So what do we do now? (And see
mail.)
=============================
Another Black Hawk down, 6 more troopers dead today,
making 32 for the week. And according to NBC News, the Army is now
bombarding the area where the attacks came from. That will certainly make
the soldiers feel better. The effect on the Iraqis isn't as clear cut.
Also on NBC News,
anarcho-tyranny is in force in Goose Creek, South Carolina, where the
police raided a high school, guns drawn, forcing students to the floor with
threats of deadly force. This certainly poses no danger to the police, and
it will certainly send a message to the students and population.
No drugs or weapons were found. I don't think the cops there tried to
justify these warrantless searches, handcuffs, and intimidations with deadly
force by appealing to the Patriot Act, but one supposes it will not be long
before that occurs to someone.
It's certainly a lot easier to intimidate students in a "zero tolerance"
situation than it is to do real police work and actually catch someone
selling drugs. Whether that is what the people want isn't so clear, but then
the people aren't often consulted. We may look for a lot more of this.
And there was another
anthrax scare
today. Where were Hatfill and Butler?
=============================
AND
Hhhmm... This looks awfully familiar. Prelude to a
DC/X clone?
http://www.isas.ac.jp/e/snews/2003/1107.shtml
E.C. "Stan" Field
Familiar indeed!
TOP
Current Mail
|
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
