Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: "The Guns of Folly" and the "Arc of Instability" in the Middle East

  1. #1

    "The Guns of Folly" and the "Arc of Instability" in the Middle East

    h/t Michael Rozeff:

    The Guns of Folly
    Tom Engelhardt (19 June 2014)

    Who Won Iraq? Lost Dreams, Lost Armies, Jihadi States, and the Arc of Instability

    As Iraq was unraveling last week and the possible outlines of the first jihadist state in modern history were coming into view, I remembered this nugget from the summer of 2002. At the time, journalist Ron Suskind had a meeting with “a senior advisor” to President George W. Bush (later identified as Karl Rove). Here’s how he described part of their conversation:

    “The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,’ which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’ I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ‘That's not the way the world really works anymore,’ he continued. ‘We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’”

    As events unfold increasingly chaotically across the region that officials of the Bush years liked to call the Greater Middle East, consider the eerie accuracy of that statement. The president, his vice president Dick Cheney, his defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and his national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, among others, were indeed “history’s actors.” They did create “new realities” and, just as Rove suggested, the rest of us are now left to “study” what they did.

    And oh, what they did! Their geopolitical dreams couldn’t have been grander or more global. (Let’s avoid the word "megalomaniacal.") They expected to pacify the Greater Middle East, garrison Iraq for generations, make Syria and Iran bow down before American power, "drain" the global "swamp" of terrorists, and create a global Pax Americana based on a military so dominant that no other country or bloc of countries would ever challenge it.

    It was quite a dream and none of it, not one smidgen, came true. Just as Rove suggested they would -- just as in the summer of 2002, he already knew they would -- they acted to create a world in their image, a world they imagined controlling like no imperial power in history. Using that unchallengeable military, they launched an invasion that blew a hole through the oil heartlands of the Middle East. They took a major capital, Baghdad, while “decapitating” (as the phrase then went) the regime that was running Iraq and had, in a particularly brutal fashion, kept the lid on internecine tensions.

    They lacked nothing when it came to confidence. Among the first moves of L. Paul Bremer III, the proconsul they appointed to run their occupation, was an order demobilizing Iraqi autocrat Saddam Hussein’s 350,000-man army and the rest of his military as well. Their plan: to replace it with a lightly armed border protection force -- initially of 12,000 troops and in the end perhaps 40,000 -- armed and trained by Washington. Given their vision of the world, it made total sense. Why would Iraq need more than that with the U.S. military hanging around for, well, ever, on a series of permanent bases the Pentagon's contractors were building? What dangers could there be in the neighborhood with that kind of force on hand? Soon enough, it became clear that what they had really done was turn the Iraqi officer corps and most of the country’s troops out onto unemployment lines, creating the basis for a militarily skilled Sunni insurgency. A brilliant start!

    Note that these days the news is filled with commentary on the lack of a functional Iraqi air force. That’s why, in recent months, Prime Minister Maliki has been calling on the Obama administration to send American air power back into the breach. Saddam Hussein did have an air force. Once it had been one of the biggest in the Middle East. The Bush administration, however, came to the conclusion that the new Iraqi military would have no need for fighter planes, helicopters, or much of anything else, not when the U.S. Air Force would be in the neighborhood on bases like Balad in Central Iraq. Who needed two air forces?

    Be Careful What You Wish For

    It was all to be a kind of war-fighting miracle. The American invaders would be greeted as liberators, the mission quickly accomplished, and “major combat operations” ended in a flash [...]

    [ ... continued at link:]

  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    (Let’s avoid the word "megalomaniacal.")
    In this case, I don't see how that's even possible.
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Americans are all in the same boat, beseiged by the same sharks. And if we don't remember that, we're all equally $#@!ed.

  4. #3
    bump. awesomeness.
    The bigger government gets, the smaller I wish it was.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-22-2015, 08:30 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-26-2015, 05:53 PM
  3. Freedom House: Israel is the Middle East's Only "Free" State
    By FrankRep in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 03:10 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-20-2011, 03:50 PM
  5. Glenn Beck: "Pull troops out of the Middle East and regroup."
    By Knightskye in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 04-04-2011, 11:23 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts