Why will we stay in Iraq?
For the President’s pride. For Halliburton’s military service contracts. For big oil’s hopes and dreams of unfettered access to Iraqi crude. For campaign contributions from defense contractors, to Democrats and Republicans alike. To cover Cheney’s ass. Because the Democratic leadership see more advantage in an unresolved Iraq War as an issue in the 2008 election, than they do in turning off the war’s money spigot in 2007. Out of cowardice. To make Joe Lieberman happy. To prove John McCain has cojones.
There are other reasons, I imagine, but there is not one good reason to stay there. We are pouring our money down a sinkhole in a vainglorious attempt to show that the military might of the United States is enough, by itself, to change centuries of animosities and mistrust in the Middle East. That our advanced weapon systems, our depleted uranium rounds and white phosphorus munitions can burn out a new American colony in the heart of the Islamic world. That our volunteer soldiers, sailors, airmen and mercenaries are sufficient to insure hegemony over Middle Eastern oil fields. That fear of our military might alone will keep the Chinese and Russian governments in line. That fear of our economic collapse (and what we might do to stave it off) will keep the Japanese and Chinese banks, to whom we are indebted to the tune of trillions of dollars, in line.
Someday, in a year, or two or three, this entire house of cards will collapse. We will face either a massive economic depression or a world war, or both. The only thing that can prevent this catastrophe from occurring is the political will and courage of our elected representatives. However, so far, all I see is political calculation and cowardice on the part of the Democratic party leaders, and political denial on the part of Republicans. It’s no surprise that the only political candidates on the right or the left who are calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, Kucinich and Gravel for the Democrats, Ron Paul for the Republicans, have been marginalized and denounced by the media as members of a lunatic fringe. For all the stars are aligned to keep the war(s) going into the foreseeable future, despite the disapproval of nearly 70% of the American public.
The big media is also a big money power. They do what is in their best interests, and government intrusion into their monopolistic practices and shallow infotainment empires is not in their interest. Big oil, the utilities, defense contractors of every stripe are willing to pay millions to politicians to ensure that their contracts continue to add billions of dollars of profits to their balance sheets. There is no one willing at this moment on time to break up the massive ponzi scheme that the American economy has become.
Follow the money. Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia was personally bribed with Two Billion Dollars by a British defense contrator. You don’t think the same thing hasn’t happened countless numbers of times before, but involving American companies? Multinational companies are willing to do whatever it takes to ensure the profits. And those profits are not trickling down to anyone much past the top 2% of Americans.
Look around. Do you see any of your friends who makes less than $200,000 a year doing better now than they were 5 years ago? As more jobs are pumped out of our economy, as oil becomes an ever more precious resource to ensure the benefits of “globalization” to the wealthiest people and corporations on earth, war will ever more come to dominate the landscape.
And that is why we will stay in Iraq. That is why all the major Democratic candidates resemble Al Smith in 1928 far more than they do Franklin Roosevelt in 1932. We haven’t yet hit bottom. Our massive military and energy industrial complex has kept us propped up, but all they are doing is delaying the inevitable (via Ian Welsh at firedoglake):
Like in the twenties, consumer spending has kept going despite the fact that consumers aren’t getting their fair share. Unlike in the 20’s the American consumer, and America as a whole, is a net debtor – Americans have kept consuming by borrowing. Estimates of how much money the US borrows range from 80% of the world’s lendable money, to over 100%. (Yeah, over. In other words, all the legal money, plus a lot of the illegal money.) The American public has been running a literally negative savings rate, and so has the US government.
In the 20’s the US was the new great industrial power behind tariff walls and with substantial trade surpluses Today it is in deficit. This parallels not the US in the 20’s, but Britain in the 20’s. At that time Britain had negative trade balances and Europe in general was in negative trade balance with the US. In order to buy cheap US goods they had to borrow the money, and the US was all too willing to lend.
Today that role is played by China and Japan. While China and Japan don’t use classic tariffs as their primary economic subsidy for their internal industries the way the US did in the 20’s, their strong intervention to keep their own currencies artificially low against the dollar (an intervention that is costing China about 10% of its entirely yearly GDP) functions the same way – a cheap Yuan or Yen makes their imports very competitive against made in America goods, and makes American manufactured goods (and American services) much less competitive in China. The massive gutting of manufacturing jobs over the last seven years is probably at least two thirds the result of these subsidies, and the massive trade and balance-of-payment deficits are also exacerbated by this policy.
The US’s consumption is fueled by what amount to Chinese and Japanese loans, and the Chinese internal economy is not sufficient to absorb the products of thier own manufacturing capacity.
Meanwhile, in China, by the end of January, there were 80 million retail brokerage accounts (when you consider the size of the Chinese middle class, this is astonishing). The Shanghai stock exchange is on a tear, real estate in much of China’s coastal areas is rising at double digit rates every year and savings accounts are paying 3% or less. Like the US in the 20’s, and unlike America today, the Chinese have a huge savings rate (around 50%). And in another, eerie presage of the Great Depression, soil erosion in China’s interior, where the majority are still farmers, is out of control and leading to dust storms. (The Great Depression was made much worse by huge dust storms as the prairie top soil blew away after years of being abused combined with a few years of drought.)
We have little time left. I suspect like Germany and Japan in the 30’s we will turn to our military to obtain the “precious fluids” and other resources necessary to preserve our economy and our power. But, like them, it won’t be enough. The only question is how quickly will our militaristic strategy take us down? My guess? Sooner than we think. You want to know why Cheney wishes to use nukes against Iran? It isn’t to destroy Iran’s pitiful nuclear program, it’s to show the world that we are still cowboys at heart, still willing to “shoot first and ask questions later,” still the only country stupid enough to have used, and to continue to plan to use, nuclear weapons against a defenseless nation.
It’s what gangsters do after all when they want to expand their territory and make more money, or to ensure the survival of their criminal enterprises from other competitors. They break a few legs, whack a few guys, do whatever is necessary, leave all options on the table. Dick wants to use those nukes not to stop Iran, but to threaten China. Count on it. And when the collapse comes, the urge to use our biggest weapon to intimidate our principal creditors and resource suppliers will only intensify.
As long as we allow politicians to be led around by the nose at the whim of their corporate paymasters, we will see no one with the courage to stand against this rising tide of authoritarianism, militarism and out-sized greed. And we will allow it to continue until the bottom falls out. In 1932 we were lucky to get Roosevelt, a progressive thinker and leader who literally saved our country from fascism. Germany was not so lucky. They got Hitler.
I fear for what may befall America when the next depression hits. And absent a miracle, that’s just what will happen. In 1932 our military was small and devalued. Today? The military is the most trusted institution in America. Now that’s a scary thought. What do you think that means for our future?
I think you’re right about the idea that the Democrats are campaigning like it is 1928. There’s a lot of merit to the idea that no one is being honest about the consequences of Bush’s presidency.
I don’t think any of the Democrats will make good presidents at this point. Al Gore is the only one who I would trust, and he’s not running.
It’s an interesting paradox: Edwards seems to break the paradigm when it comes to talking about class yet has a strong AIPAC tilt and won’t go the full 100 yards to single-payer Health Care; Obama sounds like a progressive and shatters paradigms both racial, multi-cultural and generational, but I can’t get rid of this nagging feeling that he’s a corporate tool. I keep telling friends who are supporters that I think he’d be more effective or more “paradigm changing” if there was a strong progressive base in the states.
And Hillary? She’s selling competence with a hint of progresivism and a whiff of paradigm shift; and after the last 7 years competence sounds and looks mighty good. But then you look at her record and the record of the pro-free trade democrats (sans global health, labor and environmental standards) and it leads you back to Steven D.’s hypothesis.
I think the states and bench development is where its at, but I fear it may be to0 late.
This is excellent. Capitalism will collapse under its own weight unless it is propped up by war.
Globalization is simply shorthand for worldwide unrestrained, unregulated monopolistic capitalism.
.
Saudi Royalties: Blair Halts BAE Fraud Probe in $40bn Yamamah Contract
with no recommendations (sic).
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Excellent diary Steven and I agree with you 100% except for this:
The only thing that can prevent this catastrophe from occurring is the political will and courage of our elected representatives.
I don’t think we can afford to put the responsibility on our elected officials. My take on things is that, at least at the national level, democracy is over. The sooner we recognize that – the sooner we’ll begin to define our alternatives. Northdakotademocrat used to write wonderful diaries here about the effectiveness of non-violent resistance. For me, our only hope to prevent the catastrophe you describe is if enough of us start to think about those kinds of alternatives.
You wrote what I was thinking – thanks.
I hope you’re right, but I fear we are already too late.
We haven’t yet hit bottom.
And that is why we keep waiting for Congress to do something instead of creating the movement that applies the blowtorch of public opinion to the seats of Republican and reluctant Democratic Congresscritters.
There is nothing more pathetic than omniscient impotence.
So let’s get cracking. We need to convince our friends, family, former neighbors, and co-workers (especially the Republican ones) in Republican and reluctant Democratic districts to start getting involved in shifting local public opinion.
It’s not Congress’s job to convince the American people; it’s the American people’s job to convince Congress. To think otherwise is not to want democracy. We need to remind those in Congress who they work for. (No cynicism please!)
I’d love to keep this discussion going because, I think its really important.
You said:
It’s not Congress’s job to convince the American people; it’s the American people’s job to convince Congress.
Didn’t we all just try to do that in the 2006 election? It seemed to me that, as far as Iraq is concerned, the people have spoken loud and clear. And yet, why does Congress not seem to be listening? My take is that we are living in an oligarchy – not a democracy – and they don’t listen to the people anymore. They listen to the corporate-controlled media and the military/industrial/complex. As long as we keep thinking of this as a democracy, we’ll keep being disappointed and we’ll keep loosing the battle. I think its time to start thinking outside that box.
Didn’t we all just try to do that in the 2006 election?
August is coming up. Congresscritters go to their home states and politick. If it’s true that the American people have spoken in the way that you say, then they should make themselves a pain in the neck for the Congresscritters during this recess. These representatives of the people need to hear unequivocally from the people that their propaganda is failing. This is particularly true for Republican and weak-kneed Democratic Congresscritters.
Then if they don’t get the message, start putting up primary challengers and Democratic opposition.
One of the problems might be that the “majority” who wants an immediate end to the war in Iraq is not distributed evenly across the geography. If 100% of Nancy Pelosi’s district are opposed and only 45% of Mike McIntyre’s district, McIntyre can argue that he is indeed representing his constituents in Congress. The problem may indeed be that we are still a democracy but one with a widely misinformed electorate. It is not McIntyre’s job to convince his district otherwise, it is ours to help the folks in his district who agree with us to convince their neighbors.
We keep reading the situation as if we can do nothing but vote in the next election (or sit on our hands out of pique or frustration).
The listen to the military/industrial complex only when the people are not looking.
But people are beginning to look and they don’t like what they say. Even the uniformed military, formerly stalwarts of pro-military sentiment, don’t like what they see.
For us relative to the Congresscritters, it’s no retreat, no surrender.
Has W attended a funeral for a solider from Iraq, yet? He has had 3500 (+) opportunities. Leave Iraq, today.
For me, personally, it will only be “too late” when I’m dead.
Otherwise I’m pretty much in agreement with this diary, after the first past through…
With regards to my nonviolent diaries, as referenced by NLinStPaul and tampopo; I am still of the belief that those methods can yield results in confrontation with authoritarian regimes, such as we currently have.
I have previously recommended Robert Helvey’s, On Strategic Nonviolent Conflict: Thinking about the Fundamentals. Available here.
As you will see below the concepts can be used for either good or evil.
For those of you who think nonviolent action is no longer of value in our current times consider that (Colonel) Robert Helvey with the help of the National Endowment for Democracy is currently operating in Venezuela promoting the same nonviolent tactics I previously diaried about as a means of toppling the Chavez government.
If nonviolent tactics were no longer effective then why would our government and Col Robert Helvey see these same nonviolent methods as a valuable weapon against the Chavez government?
Just to be clear, I obviously oppose ANY US interference in Venezuela.
If you google, Helvey Venezuela, or, Helvey Venezuela nonviolence, and you’ll see further information on the current use of nonviolent action in Venezuela, such as
What is the National Endowment for Democracy up to?