Letters the Editor - On Iraq
Letters the Editor - On Iraq
Copyright by The Chicago Free Press
June 20, 2007
There is a revelatory lesson in all this urban warfare and jihadist violence: From Baghdad to Beirut and from Gaza to Kabul, these recruits to the ultimate in reactionary cults threaten the existing states in the Muslim world far more than America or its Western allies. They are one side in a conflict centered within the Muslim world. Contrary to President George W. Bush’s notion, this is not America’s long war against terrorism but the Islamic world’s conflict with itself.
The recent world events point to what most of the intelligence agencies refuse to share with the American people. Just like we were lied to about the weapons of mass destruction and the connection between Saddam Hussein with Al Qaeda, we are now being lied to, perhaps because they are unable to tell the truth, but most likely because of the stubbornness of the commander in chief (who talks to God the Almighty) that we are at war with the terrorists. After all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the opponents of the war for lack of patriotism—exposing the country to greater danger.
Let’s suppose that we bring all the troops home from Iraq tomorrow. Would the retaliatory strike against Sunni Arabs be any different? Just like Hamas on Gaza, the two factions—Sunni and Shiite—will fight their civil war until one side wins. It is a crime against our brave American troops to place them in the crossfire of a civil war that will not be resolved through military intervention by an outside party. The only way to avoid further bloodbath in Iraq requires a political solution. The problem is that just like Hamas and Fatah, these conflicts have persisted for centuries. America, just like the British before, should remember the history of the region. It is not like a civil war is something we don’t comprehend. If my memory serves me right, we fought one from 1861 to 1865. What would you think would have happened if the British or the French would have tried to mediate it?
The only difference is that America’s incompetent leaders initiated Iraq’s civil war. Instead of sacrificing our young armed forces, I would put on trial the people responsible for crimes against humanity and get our soldiers out of harms way.
Carlos T Mock
Chicago
Copyright by The Chicago Free Press
June 20, 2007
There is a revelatory lesson in all this urban warfare and jihadist violence: From Baghdad to Beirut and from Gaza to Kabul, these recruits to the ultimate in reactionary cults threaten the existing states in the Muslim world far more than America or its Western allies. They are one side in a conflict centered within the Muslim world. Contrary to President George W. Bush’s notion, this is not America’s long war against terrorism but the Islamic world’s conflict with itself.
The recent world events point to what most of the intelligence agencies refuse to share with the American people. Just like we were lied to about the weapons of mass destruction and the connection between Saddam Hussein with Al Qaeda, we are now being lied to, perhaps because they are unable to tell the truth, but most likely because of the stubbornness of the commander in chief (who talks to God the Almighty) that we are at war with the terrorists. After all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the opponents of the war for lack of patriotism—exposing the country to greater danger.
Let’s suppose that we bring all the troops home from Iraq tomorrow. Would the retaliatory strike against Sunni Arabs be any different? Just like Hamas on Gaza, the two factions—Sunni and Shiite—will fight their civil war until one side wins. It is a crime against our brave American troops to place them in the crossfire of a civil war that will not be resolved through military intervention by an outside party. The only way to avoid further bloodbath in Iraq requires a political solution. The problem is that just like Hamas and Fatah, these conflicts have persisted for centuries. America, just like the British before, should remember the history of the region. It is not like a civil war is something we don’t comprehend. If my memory serves me right, we fought one from 1861 to 1865. What would you think would have happened if the British or the French would have tried to mediate it?
The only difference is that America’s incompetent leaders initiated Iraq’s civil war. Instead of sacrificing our young armed forces, I would put on trial the people responsible for crimes against humanity and get our soldiers out of harms way.
Carlos T Mock
Chicago
posted by Carlos T Mock @ 8:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home