This blog is in response to the conversations I have been having with people who don't understand why we are in Iraq and what we are trying to accomplish. To answer this I am almost always forced to deliver a refresher course in history and conquest in particular. Not that I think any of the readers of this blog truly need this edification, but this is an interesting way to formulate your argument so as to be inclusive of the facts.
This, then, is a historical and strategic discourse, in time order, regarding the reasons for America's wars, past and present.
Since the dawn of civilization humans have been fighting against other humans. Even before humans focused on fighting against other humans there is evidence that we fought and exterminated our cousins on the evolutionary pathway, the Neanderthal. Why? The Neanderthal occupied more fertile lands than we Homo erecti did, thus a war ensued. In these times war subsequently followed by occupation was the order of the day.
Fast forward. Screen fades into Nile delta. Workers harves fields. Pan to pyramids and eventually to bearded, bald headed pharaoh. Trumpets sound.
Where did the ancient Egyptians get their land? The former inhabitants of the area were northern African tribes, unorganized, warlike and nomadic. Enter displaced citizens from Mesopotamia, probably southern Babylonian, fleeing the flooding. "What have we here?", they said. An area geographically similar to their former home, periodically flooding river and all, inhabited by savages. It took such a short time to conquer the area, set up a government and enslave the people that Roman historian Pliny the Elder hardly comments on it at all.
We see in the bible that many wars were fought over control of land and people I.e. the Babylonians conquering Israel, the Macabee's retaking Israel, the Romans conquering Israel, the Jews retaking Israel. Israel may be the most faught over land in the world, nearly devoid of resources, yet strategically rather important.
Let's speak about the Romans as they were the world's first true super power. The Roman ideal of victory was conquer, controll and reap the benefits. This created an overextended command structure, overextended supply chain and loss of controll, militarily, politically and ideologically in the outlying states of the empire. These reasons, paramount among many others, caused the eventual decay of the Roman Empire.
In much the same vein as the Romans, the countries of Europe also sought to create empires. The English empire was so large at one point that the altruism "The sun never sets on the English empire", was actually true! Spain was responsible for much of what occurred in south America both good and bad, and the French made great inroads in North America. I think we are all also aware of the influence of the Dutch and French in Africa.
The point is that all of these empires failed for just about the same reasons the Roman Empire did. People, no matter how simple, don't like to be ruled from afar. Our own country was born out of those very ideals.
So, I told you that to tell you this: there is a way around physically conquering a country. Let's look at the last 100 years. During WWI Germany, hungry for more land and resources and fueled by a special Prussian manifest destiny, went apeshit and got all up in other folks faces. Long story short, they lose. Now, America did some important things which ensured it's economic superiority in the years to come.
1. Entering the war in the first place showed Europe that we were interested in it. (The first major part of a business plan or major financial acquisition is a letter of intent!)
2. By first assisting the Allied powers and then superseding their own efforts with a superiority of manpower allowed us to show our might in stages, rather like a game of poker. Rushing in and cleaning up the mess immediately would have downplayed our role. The investment of time in the cause was paramount to winning.
3. And most importantly, the war effort allowed, through the military supply routes already established, increased Euro-American trade. Allies were created who were politically beholden to us and thus, allowed us to get away with "shit". I.e. the Falkland islands during the eighties.
The almost male bonding nature of political change after a war is an important consideration just as much today. But there's more. After WWI a new nation was created as a buffer between Germany and western Europe. Checkoslovakia. Tada!!! Instant American ally in eastern Europe! The more astute readers can probably see where I am going by now.
For years Checkoslovakia supplied American business with cheap labor, cheap parts and most importantly cheap strategic American bases. Why? Cuz we built the fucking place!
This pattern of ally creation can be seen throughout the last 200 years of our history, and we are not the only country who does it. But, we are the best at it.
You see, during the revolutionary war America needed allies and needed them damn quickly. We had almost no navy, what were we to do? What? Barberry pirates? We chased them out of our eastern seaboard already because they were interrupting shipping lanes. They're hanging out in Florida? Fuck! Call 'em up!
Revolutionary war over, we owe these pirates something. Hey it's 1812! We're having problems with those wiley British and faggoty French! Ok, pirates, you guys go get em!
Well, long story short, the British capture the pirates and impress them into service for themselves, America has already built a fairly acceptable Navy and the outcome is... we win and take more land from the faggoty French, I.e. Faggoty Michigan and Wisconsin!
These are the ways we use people and wars to get what we want. So, what's happening today?
Saddam Hussein. There was a time when the most feared person in the middle east was an old bastard named The Ayatollah Khomenie. He lived in Iran, which was right next to a country full of crazy, bug eyed, IMPRESSIONABLE, fanatics called Iraq. We sent out feelers. How can we keep these Iraqis from going over to these crazy fundamental ideals of the Iatolah's? Well, we will need a real bastard. Someone who would kill his own mother to keep the peace and the oil flowing. 555-6666. "Hello?" Is this Saddam? "Hey guy!" Saddam, it's America, we need your help controlling the Iraqis. "Hey, no problem guy, I know just what to do!" Ok, we'll put you in power but only for a few years, we will need someone in there later when things are calmed down more to direct cheap oil and money our way. Now whatever you do just run the place and keep things civil and don't attack the Ayatollah! "Sure, no problem guy, I'll take care of it!"
1 month later. Saddam Hussein kills hundreds of fundamentalist leaders and politicians in Iraq.
5 months later. After many terrible acts, Iraq has the lowest crime rate in the middle east and its per capita income is steadily rising.
2 years later. 555-6666 SADDAM!! "Hey guy!" We said DON'T attack the Ayatollah! "Hey, guy, it's ok. I'm just having some fun!" Look fucker, that does it! We're going to save Iran and look like hero's, you are going to lose and have your soldiers eventually give up. "OK guy, jeeze, way to spoil a good time!"
I think you get the picture from there on.
The point is that Saddam Hussein was selected for his post by the CIA during the late 70's. Who ran the CIA in the late 70's? George Bush Sr. Need I say more?
Thus, my point is, we are creating an ally in the region for our own benefit just as we have done many times before. This is a standard operation which is running slightly afoul. If all goes well, though, we may see some amazing results from this little shithole we call Iraq.
