Reading some of the comments and diaries lately about Iraq has been very enlightening and very depressing.
Isn’t that like “White Man’s Burden”? To which the response was written in 1899:
And, if ye rouse his hate,
Meet his old-fashioned reasons
With Maxims up to date.
With shells and dumdum bullets
A hundred times made plain
The brown man’s loss must ever
Imply the white man’s gain.
Pile on the brown man’s burden,
compel him to be free;
Let all your manifestoes
Reek with philanthropy.
And if with heathen folly
He dares your will dispute,
Then, in the name of freedom,
Don’t hesitate to shoot.
(from The Brown Man’s Burden
by Henry Labouchère)
Then today responding to the sky-is-falling Juan Cole piece, we’ve got what amounts to a whole series of comments like:
Three questions of a rhetorical nature, which I asked on dKos as well…
First verse:
What gives us the right, having violated international law and invaded another country without provocation, killing perhaps 100,000 people and destroying the place utterly, to decide anything at all about its future?
Second verse:
Why should I — an aspiring to be reality-based Tigger — assume that philanthropy is the true aim of any American administration in any foreign country, let alone a BushCo administration?
Third verse:
Why should I — an aspiring to be reality-based Tigger — assume that even if it had the best intentions (which we know it does not), a BushCo administration could succeed at such goals? This is because of their past performance at grand projects of nation building and philanthropy?
Supporting the continued occupation of Iraq by the USA (and the UK) assigns to us arrogant invaders rights we do not have. Furthermore it assigns to BushCo benevolent intentions that they do not have. Furthermore it assigns to BushCo a characteristic of competence that they do not possess.
The following, apparently, is a difficult sentence to parse?
We are responsible for paying for the rebuilding of Iraq. Supplying machinery, spare parts, equipment, supplies for schools and hospitals, individual expertise if they request it from us. That is the only mission left. (In a dream world: an apology and a trial of the war criminals… but we must leave that battle for the distant future…)
Everything else about “the mission” sounds like so much Kipling.
— Mohandas Ghandi’s answer when asked what he thought of Western Civilization
Take up the White Man’s burden–
The savage wars of peace–
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.
The whole thing is here:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/Kipling.html
Watch out for that sloth and heathen folly, huh? 🙁
The problem, tigger, is that if the scenario laid out in Cole’s piece (essentially the recreation of the Lebanese disaster on a grand, global scale) does come to pass, the people least likely to suffer the terrible consequences are the people who started this garbage in the first place – the US and British ruling elite, their corporate pink collar and white collar shock troops, and their lackeys in the media.
The people MOST likely to suffer the terrible consequences are, in increasing order of damage and pain…
The middle classes of the industrialized nations
The working class of the industrialized nations.
The poor and working poor of the industrialized nations.
The middle classes in the non-industrialized, de-industrialized and developing nations
The working classes in those same nations.
And the vast, massive, burgeoning population of the global underclass.
That last group, if the scenario laid out by Cole comes to pass, will suffer massively and terribly.
Is it our fault?
Yes.
Should we pay the price?
Yes.
Do I think our leaders should be tried for war crimes, crimes against the peace and crimes against humanity?
Yes.
Do I think that the US and Great Britain should pay reparations and put their armed services and engineering might under the explicit and direct orders of either the Iraqis or the UN and be used to rebuild that nation?
Yes.
Do I think that Cole is mapping his Lebanon disaster experience onto this situation?
To a degree.
Is that mapping out of line, hyper alarmist, and not realistic?
It is far too dangerous a situation to NOT take a hard look at what he is saying.
Q: Is world opinion in favor of continued US occupation of Iraq?
By the “A much bigger disaster will befall the world if we leave” theory of Iraq, they should all be clamoring for us to stay, shouldn’t they? So I’ll go turn on the television and look for film at 11 of the massive demonstrations in support of our continued occupation of Iraq and continued saving of the globe from calamity.
“So sorry there, Mr Iraqi, but we simply had to gun down your family at that checkpoint entering the Green Zone in order to save the world. It’s no longer just about you. It’s the whole globe we’re talking about. You understand, don’t you”?
No, that’s a false equivalence and a strawman argument.
The US military, corporate, mercenary, and “diplomatic” forces and personnel MUST leave Iraq, because we are making the potential for eventual disaster greater, not less.
However, the point is that simple abandonment of Iraq to its own devices is really NOT that simple, and there is great potential for great harm to that nation (even more than now), to the region, and to the globe if a complete power vacuum is created.
That is why I said this:
He thinks that many of the same actors and forces are at play in Iraq, and that if the same kind of scenarios that played out in Lebanon start playing out in Iraq, that the consequences for the region and the world will be far, far worse than the consequences of a continued foreign presence under UN auspices.
Whether or not this is the “Global South” fighting our wars for us or not (and I certainly think that case can be made), his point is that, unfortunately, the US is so badly tainted by our actions and deceptions and brutality that we cannot in any way shape or form maintain ANY visible or sub rosa presence there without further inflaming the situation, and that the consequences of total disengagement on the part of the international community would result in a Lebanon-style meltdown that would be much, much worse than anyone is really imagining.
Again, I am not sure if I agree with him, but that’s where I think he is coming from, and I think it bears consideration.
I think that what SHOULD happen is that our war leaders should be tried for war crimes and if convicted, hung by the neck until dead. That the US should pay unconditional and massive reparations, that our armed forces and engineering capabilities should be put under the orders of either the Iraqis or the UN and forced to rebuild that country at OUR cost…
That, I think would really go a long way toward solving the situation…
But that’s even more implausible, unfortunately, than the UN/Global South option.
Did the Iraqi people build their own country, their own infrastructure, staff their own hospitals and police force and so on? Yes. Do they have their own engineers, experts, professors, designers, builders, construction companies, and so on? Yes. Are they perfectly capable of rebuilding their own nation on their own terms using their own people, expertise, and resources? Yes.
No argument from me.
However, are there extremely dangerous, powerful, and destructive actors, forces, tendencies, and operations ongoing in the region that will, are, and would do everything and anything to carve up, derail, destroy, and manipulate that process for political, monetary, social, and theocratic aims? Yes.
Do those groups and actors have the power and influence and ability to wreak large-scale havoc of a sort that could have disasterous global implications? Yes.
Is that our fault? In large part, yes.
Is there anything that our presence there can do to ameliorate the sitiuation? No way, we only make it worse.
Should we pay reparations and support both the Iraqi people and the UN in efforts to bolster Iraqi-led rebuilding and quash the disaster-makers? Yes.
Are we part and parcel of those disaster-makers, and should we pay dearly for our part in that? Absolutely.
that I’m not blaming Juan Cole for this. I think what has happened is people read his “sky-is-falling” argument and have been REPLACING his suggestion that the forces be internationalized with the “realistic” idea that US troops need to stay because there are no international forces capable of military victory (whatever that means)
So just let me clear that up. It’s not a straw man argument I gave, because I’m repeating what people are saying all over the place. They read Juan Cole, said “oh my God, disaster is about to hit!” — we (meaning the US of A) need to stay!
He (Juan Cole) did not say that. He said:
That’s a slightly different argument than the one many posters are making!
I like many of your ideas on the subject. I happen to agree that if the USA is in any way involved except from a long distance and with a big checkbook giving aid to Iraqis trying to rebuild, it will thoroughly taint anything benevolent we could be involved in.
Unfortunately until BushCo are in jail, I am forced to conclude they are a huge hindrance to peace, stability, and reconstruction. They’re never going to do the right thing, so the best thing to do is drag them as far away as possible from Iraq. And that can only happen with a US military withdrawal.
Absolutely, totally agreed on every point.
I would add that military withdrawal should be accompanied by war crimes, crimes against the peace, and crimes against humanity charges and trials; reparations should be determined and paid; and the US military/engineering/industrial complex should be put at the disposal of the Iraqi people or their duly selected and designated representative…
Kinda like what we did to Germany and Japan…and considering that what we did to Iraq resembles very closely what the Germans and Japanese did to the Poles and the Chinese, respectively, I think the parallel treatment is very apt.
you’re certainly not afraid to dream big.
Every day when I wake up I sorta cringe when I turn on the news radio. What new bad thing will have happened? Because BushCo still runs America and threatens the entire world.
Thanks. I like yours too. You are much better at conflict management than I am.
By the way, can I make a criticism/suggestion?
It is NOT “the Left” that is hollering White Man’s Burden…
It is the Center-Liberal-Bourgeois that are doing so.
The Left is saying things that can be read in The Socialist Worker or The International Socialist Review…or any number of their sister and brother publications.
I have to concede! … what I called “The Left” (e.g. the dailyKos median opinion) is really not too left, especially if viewed from the entire Earth’s perspective. I am forced to admit that I did that in the interests of provocative diary title making(tm).
Iraq will not be fixed and there will be a civil war. The only question is how many more americans have to die before we give up. How many more have to kill or be killed? How long before our economy is totally busted?
from us.
Iraq is a humanitarian crisis that is man-made. Our government’s intentions should be assumed to be malevolent unless otherwise demonstrated, given that we attacked Iraq without provocation. I am quite confident in guessing that the rest of the world, and especially the people of Iraq, see our intentions there as malevolent.
I tend to agree with this assessment from (of all places) the Lew Rockwell:
Of course we all saw through these lies. To us, the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was a transparent and brutal exercise of empire. It was evidence of the moral rot in the Kremlin. In the end, the Soviets controlled only the ground underneath their tank treads. It was the last hurrah of an evil empire.
Americans need to face the reality that most of the world sees our nation as the new evil empire, and many people in the Gulf region are dedicated to making sure that the Iraq War is the last hurrah for American militarism. How tragic to admit that the analogy is not entirely implausible.
Rather than more of the same, what is really needed is more of the opposite.
BushCo. is at a “which is worse” point. The economics are the only reason BushCo. has been able to do this much damage. Sure, Bush wanted war for fame and fortune and unlimited power, but without continued financial backing, he has nothing. Economics are the only thing that will stop them. Multi-national economics.
The rub is that BushCo. will not admit defeat. I fear that for them, defeat is worse than total destruction. They’ve boxed themselves in with their go-it-alone approach, burned their bridges and have no idea what to do with the smoldering heap.
The mission of rebuilding Iraq cannot take place in the midst of civil war. Civil war may or may not be WWIII, but I sure as hell don’t want BushCo. at the wheel in either case. Escalating civil war on a powder keg holding the world’s energy is scary, scary stuff.
You remember Einstein’s words, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
Indeed it would be.
I need to read the Cole diaries more closely, and when less tired, so I’m not commenting on them here.
But independently of that, I think your rhetorical questions are dead on target. I find myself reminded of Kipling far too often these days.
Slightly OT, I have to say I really miss having Ductape around.
Dove, with no e-mail contact for you, I’ll ask here: you mentioned in an open thread a few days back that you’d e-mailed Ductape. I take it there’s still no reply? I’m worried.
Apologies, everyone, for being OT.
Hi canberra boy,
Alas, I’ve still heard nothing back from Ductape. At this point I’m worried too — he last commented here and at dKos on 5/6. It’s getting to be on the long side for a vacation.
PS I emailed him on 11/6
I agree with what you say. We need to get out and now. If only because that’s what Iraqis want.
After that, we need to send lots of money to Iraq and to support the rebuilding of the country’s infrastructure.
There’s no good way out. But every day we’re there it gets harder to get out.