Comments on Iraq Situation
I have now read the blog “www.riverbendblog.blogspot.com”. I will continue to monitor it. It provides a fresh insight into the world the media doesn’t reveal because it is not a simple one-liner and requires thought and comprehension to appreciate what is being said. It provides some clues to the question “Who is behind the unrest in Iraq?” It makes me doubt the morality of the War on Terrorists. Yes I agree that the thousands of innocents who died in the attack on the twin towers in New York were horrific. Brought fear into my soul that I might be next if the terrorists target Melbourne Australia. But the deaths caused in the twin towers are less than the number of innocents who starve to death each week in Africa. The fortune that America has committed to the war on terrorism yet American aid comes with US self-interest tacked to the conditions. (Most Australian aid is a gift admit ably with strings whereas most US aid is a loan, of which repayment is expected). Source of that information was a claim made by Malcolm Fraser who was a Prime Minister of Australia in the past. He made the claim while appearing on an Australian Broadcasting Corporation program called LATELINE.
Americans like to believe that they are moral, loving, God-fearing and privileged people. Most Americans that I have met, I quite like. But the policies and actions of those faceless forms of no-position in the multi-national corporations fill me with horror. For instance, one piece of trivia that I learnt recently is that when Nelson Mandela was elected President of South Africa, sixty percent of multi-nationals promptly departed the Republic of South Africa leaving an economic vacuum. I don’t recall much publicity about this blatant corruption of power. Also I find very little comprehensive analysis of the motivation behind the suicide bombers except the quick dismissal that they are mindless terrorists hoping for many virgins to be put at their disposal in the hereafter.
America still hasn’t got over the Vietnam War. The suggestion that it was immoral still causes a reek in most Americans. It has had and continues to have a profound effect on American foreign policy and the American psyche. The analysis seems to be that they don’t want any more long-term engagements rather than the more basic truth that the major motivation for the Vietnam War was seriously flawed. In Vietnam, a serious mistake by many commanders, was that they hadn’t read the books produced by their enemies. “Know thy enemy” would be a valuable lesson to learn in Iraq.
They have proved in Iraq that a conventional force is piecemeal against their military might. But in winning the hearts and minds of the ordinary people, I perceive a serious lack of ambition beyond the immediate grandstand appearance of being seen to be fighting for democracy.
America lost in Vietnam. Unless something basic changes in Iraq, I predict another messy loss.
The attitude that democracy is the solution to economic woes is a fundamental denial of our long fight for basic issues in refining the democratic process. To quote Winston Church, “Democracy is not a good system but it is the best system we’ve got”. The system is not inherently good as it is so exposed to manipulation and excesses by a select few.
I will admit that initially I supported the war in both Vietnam and Iraq. I believed the politicians and media hype especially about weapons of mass destruction and the horde of communists heading down the peninsula. Now I find the explanation that intelligence was inaccurate too simplistic. I look to factors such as the motivation of our leaders and the pressure, good and bad, to which the media subjects our leaders.
JFK wanted to bring the advisor troops home from Vietnam long before it escalated into the multi-billion dollar expression of American commitment, know how and pig-headed determination to be seen to win for the “sake of democracy”. The only ones that won were those profiteering from the war machine and the relatively poor North Vietnam.
I notice that the array of movies depicting American Special Forces troops fighting impossible odds and winning is declining. I view that in a possible light. It shows the implicit thinking that America is represented by these elite troops. Yes, they are good but no one is as good as they were depicted. It is symptomatic of the American denial that there was something unsavoury about their involvement in Vietnam. When will America get over it?
Some time ago on an American news program, I heard a four or five star general complaining about those retired generals who had dared criticize the secretary of defence claiming that there were proper channels to air their grievances. The reply by the secretary was commendable at face value but I suspect that the real motive is to just delay until the fuss dies down. In other words, play the media until everyone loses interest. George W is embattled in some basic errors of judgement about what to do once the tanks and air power have squashed mass organized opposition. The “system” and the media require un-swaying devotion is how I interpret what the general was saying. The American system is so large and wide open to manipulation by a select wealthy few that this argument wells up anger in me. It is a fragmentation of the truth. It suggests that if proper channels are followed, the truth will prevail and that open violations of the democratic process don’t occur. This is blatantly just not true.
Without a free and open media educating a public willing to question, democracy in the American expression is a farce. In my Australian context, I am deeply concerned about what George W’s good friend; the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard is doing to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation under the pretext of one-liner answers.
I think the USA is failing in Iraq, just like in Vietnam. Just one instance is when a claim was made that Iraqis were not feeling secure; George W rang his puppet mates housed in a bunker seeking a denial. Strangely enough, he got the denial and verbalized this on international television as proof that his policies were working in Iraq. Given that he can’t tell the truth, as that would be unpopular, I admit some hesitation at accusing him of being a liar. But I do not hear a message of victory, just delaying tactics. At best, we the coalition of the willing can expect a stalemate for a few years as the puppet power brokers put on a show for the benefit of the world but not the Iraqi people who we are supposed to have liberated.
George W and his executive is claiming that the war on terrorism is working to shore up his castle against the surrounding bulging mind-swell of American sentiment embittered by the lies of the Vietnam and the unpopular suggestion that America’s involvement in that particular war was immoral.
The claim that we are fighting for democracy seems a bit thin. Anyone with more that a curtsey knowledge of America’s problems including such factors as the American civil war knows that there is much more fundamental issues basically at stake.
I don’t know what to do in Iraq. I don’t think that George W knows what to do.
While the reasons for the war may be seriously flawed, I groan inwardly at the suggestion that a pullout at this stage will solve anything other than solve the problem of the popularity of the President of the United States concerned about another costly Vietnam. It is seen as part of the war on terrorists and not one for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. The Americans have learnt very little basic truth from Vietnam except to “control” the media reporting and keep it simple even if it is complex. Lying to the American people, or rather providing misleading information kept some pressure off LBJ so George W is twisting the truth as a delaying tactic hoping that the blue bird of happiness will come swooping in and make it all right.
The media requires a quick, black or white, one-line answer. Iraq is different to Vietnam but I fear the consequence will be to dither around twisting the truth until a successive president of the US brings the troops home. Then there will be disaster in Iraq as the various power brokers fight to be successor to the dictator that the original aim was to dispose of.
The sooner that Americans get over their subliminal belief that they are God's chosen and study the Old Testament of the Bible for a better and more accurate perspective of God's chosen, the better.
I believe that a healthy start would be for the US president to start a healing process with the American psyche by declaring, “Vietnam was a costly mistake and as a direct consequence, things are not going too well in Iraq”.
Jeff
Americans like to believe that they are moral, loving, God-fearing and privileged people. Most Americans that I have met, I quite like. But the policies and actions of those faceless forms of no-position in the multi-national corporations fill me with horror. For instance, one piece of trivia that I learnt recently is that when Nelson Mandela was elected President of South Africa, sixty percent of multi-nationals promptly departed the Republic of South Africa leaving an economic vacuum. I don’t recall much publicity about this blatant corruption of power. Also I find very little comprehensive analysis of the motivation behind the suicide bombers except the quick dismissal that they are mindless terrorists hoping for many virgins to be put at their disposal in the hereafter.
America still hasn’t got over the Vietnam War. The suggestion that it was immoral still causes a reek in most Americans. It has had and continues to have a profound effect on American foreign policy and the American psyche. The analysis seems to be that they don’t want any more long-term engagements rather than the more basic truth that the major motivation for the Vietnam War was seriously flawed. In Vietnam, a serious mistake by many commanders, was that they hadn’t read the books produced by their enemies. “Know thy enemy” would be a valuable lesson to learn in Iraq.
They have proved in Iraq that a conventional force is piecemeal against their military might. But in winning the hearts and minds of the ordinary people, I perceive a serious lack of ambition beyond the immediate grandstand appearance of being seen to be fighting for democracy.
America lost in Vietnam. Unless something basic changes in Iraq, I predict another messy loss.
The attitude that democracy is the solution to economic woes is a fundamental denial of our long fight for basic issues in refining the democratic process. To quote Winston Church, “Democracy is not a good system but it is the best system we’ve got”. The system is not inherently good as it is so exposed to manipulation and excesses by a select few.
I will admit that initially I supported the war in both Vietnam and Iraq. I believed the politicians and media hype especially about weapons of mass destruction and the horde of communists heading down the peninsula. Now I find the explanation that intelligence was inaccurate too simplistic. I look to factors such as the motivation of our leaders and the pressure, good and bad, to which the media subjects our leaders.
JFK wanted to bring the advisor troops home from Vietnam long before it escalated into the multi-billion dollar expression of American commitment, know how and pig-headed determination to be seen to win for the “sake of democracy”. The only ones that won were those profiteering from the war machine and the relatively poor North Vietnam.
I notice that the array of movies depicting American Special Forces troops fighting impossible odds and winning is declining. I view that in a possible light. It shows the implicit thinking that America is represented by these elite troops. Yes, they are good but no one is as good as they were depicted. It is symptomatic of the American denial that there was something unsavoury about their involvement in Vietnam. When will America get over it?
Some time ago on an American news program, I heard a four or five star general complaining about those retired generals who had dared criticize the secretary of defence claiming that there were proper channels to air their grievances. The reply by the secretary was commendable at face value but I suspect that the real motive is to just delay until the fuss dies down. In other words, play the media until everyone loses interest. George W is embattled in some basic errors of judgement about what to do once the tanks and air power have squashed mass organized opposition. The “system” and the media require un-swaying devotion is how I interpret what the general was saying. The American system is so large and wide open to manipulation by a select wealthy few that this argument wells up anger in me. It is a fragmentation of the truth. It suggests that if proper channels are followed, the truth will prevail and that open violations of the democratic process don’t occur. This is blatantly just not true.
Without a free and open media educating a public willing to question, democracy in the American expression is a farce. In my Australian context, I am deeply concerned about what George W’s good friend; the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard is doing to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation under the pretext of one-liner answers.
I think the USA is failing in Iraq, just like in Vietnam. Just one instance is when a claim was made that Iraqis were not feeling secure; George W rang his puppet mates housed in a bunker seeking a denial. Strangely enough, he got the denial and verbalized this on international television as proof that his policies were working in Iraq. Given that he can’t tell the truth, as that would be unpopular, I admit some hesitation at accusing him of being a liar. But I do not hear a message of victory, just delaying tactics. At best, we the coalition of the willing can expect a stalemate for a few years as the puppet power brokers put on a show for the benefit of the world but not the Iraqi people who we are supposed to have liberated.
George W and his executive is claiming that the war on terrorism is working to shore up his castle against the surrounding bulging mind-swell of American sentiment embittered by the lies of the Vietnam and the unpopular suggestion that America’s involvement in that particular war was immoral.
The claim that we are fighting for democracy seems a bit thin. Anyone with more that a curtsey knowledge of America’s problems including such factors as the American civil war knows that there is much more fundamental issues basically at stake.
I don’t know what to do in Iraq. I don’t think that George W knows what to do.
While the reasons for the war may be seriously flawed, I groan inwardly at the suggestion that a pullout at this stage will solve anything other than solve the problem of the popularity of the President of the United States concerned about another costly Vietnam. It is seen as part of the war on terrorists and not one for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. The Americans have learnt very little basic truth from Vietnam except to “control” the media reporting and keep it simple even if it is complex. Lying to the American people, or rather providing misleading information kept some pressure off LBJ so George W is twisting the truth as a delaying tactic hoping that the blue bird of happiness will come swooping in and make it all right.
The media requires a quick, black or white, one-line answer. Iraq is different to Vietnam but I fear the consequence will be to dither around twisting the truth until a successive president of the US brings the troops home. Then there will be disaster in Iraq as the various power brokers fight to be successor to the dictator that the original aim was to dispose of.
The sooner that Americans get over their subliminal belief that they are God's chosen and study the Old Testament of the Bible for a better and more accurate perspective of God's chosen, the better.
I believe that a healthy start would be for the US president to start a healing process with the American psyche by declaring, “Vietnam was a costly mistake and as a direct consequence, things are not going too well in Iraq”.
Jeff
posted by Emile_Zola at 3:50 PM
0 comments
