Originally Posted 9.11.2007 7:27:35 PM
Just as many of you, I was appalled by the events of 9/11. At the time, I published a note on my web site asking people to ask themselves what they knew of the world situation before 9/11 and suggested that they might what to become more educated about who likes us and who does not and why. I repeated the often used phrases, "freedom isn’t free" and "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance". I supported our response in Afghanistan. Getting the ringleader of the criminal gang that attacked us was a legitimate response.
There was an outpouring of support for the United States in almost every country of the world. The tribute posted at http://www.usmemorialday.org/images/movies/memflash03.html is a touching reminder of that support. Today we are held in a quite a different light by most peoples around the world except perhaps for a few Sunni ruled kingdoms. I ask you a simple question, why?
No government organization or report has ever said that Iraq had anything to do with the terrible events of 9/11. At the time of the invasion of Iraq I thought it had more to do with our need to secure an oil supply in the face of a looming oil peak and a growing lack of support/instability in Sunni nations. Whatever the reason for our invasion, we won the war but botched the peace terribly. What we see today is the result of incredible poor/hasty planning for the peace and some very poor decisions made on the ground by Bremer and Rundsfeldt with no consultation with the State Department or even the National Security Advisor. Our ground troops are paying the price. And once again I ask, why?
The details of the Iraqi conflict are very convoluted and few people outside of a few Middle Eastern scholars really can explain the myriad of factions and religious organizations involved and how they interact and conflict with each other. I sympathize General Patreaus. He has been put in a very untenable position and one that has no clear cut definition of victory. Eliminating those that claim allegiance to Bin Laden will not end the conflict. The Sunni Shiite rivalry has a religious basis that will never go away and there is nothing we can do to end it other than arming both side to a stand off. This appears to be our strategy in An Wahr. The Kurds stand apart from this conflict and have a stable territory but their own zealots harass Turkey causing us another headache. They will be left at peace by the Sunni and Shiite only until one or the other gains the upper hand over the remainder of the country then they will come knocking on the Kurds door. Or perhaps the Turks will come knocking, particularly if they abandon the non-secular society founded by Ataturk.
Ataturk founded modern Turkey by ruthlessly knocking heads together (or off) of any religious leader who opposed him. We here in the United States have always maintained the separation of religion from government and have enjoyed tremendous freedom and prosperity. We tend to support non-secular leaders for the same reason. One immediate example comes to mind, the Shah of Iran. He was installed by us and supported by us. To maintain power both Ataturk and the Shah did things that Americans were and are uncomfortable with today. There was once such a person in Iraq. His name was Saddam. We supported him against Iran with weapons and equipment as well as intelligence I suspect. This was after he had done some of those things (gassing the Kurds)which we are uncomfortable with today and we knew it even then. So once again I ask a question, why did we let this man invade Kuwait in the first place and then why did we depose him when he was well contained?
Politicians are about getting elected. George Bush is a politician and he has used fear and attacks on others as too weak to wage war to continue his agenda. If this conflict is so important and as we all know if will take a long time to resolve, why has he not raised taxes, increased the force structure and instituted the draft. Rather he has cut taxes and just recently asked for an insufficient force structure increase. In addition he has abridged the personal freedoms of all Americans and condoned torture that I at least was taught was unconscionable. His administration is at the minimum incompetent and at the worst criminal. Either way it is every American’s duty to remain vigilant both from external as well as internal threats. Incompetent or criminal, this administration deserves to be asked hard questions and not unreasoning acceptance of its statements and rational. Our way of doing this has always been through politicians and the press. This is American democracy at work. Please do not scorn it, embrace it, the truth will become apparent.
Just as many of you, I was appalled by the events of 9/11. At the time, I published a note on my web site asking people to ask themselves what they knew of the world situation before 9/11 and suggested that they might what to become more educated about who likes us and who does not and why. I repeated the often used phrases, "freedom isn’t free" and "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance". I supported our response in Afghanistan. Getting the ringleader of the criminal gang that attacked us was a legitimate response.
There was an outpouring of support for the United States in almost every country of the world. The tribute posted at http://www.usmemorialday.org/images/movies/memflash03.html is a touching reminder of that support. Today we are held in a quite a different light by most peoples around the world except perhaps for a few Sunni ruled kingdoms. I ask you a simple question, why?
No government organization or report has ever said that Iraq had anything to do with the terrible events of 9/11. At the time of the invasion of Iraq I thought it had more to do with our need to secure an oil supply in the face of a looming oil peak and a growing lack of support/instability in Sunni nations. Whatever the reason for our invasion, we won the war but botched the peace terribly. What we see today is the result of incredible poor/hasty planning for the peace and some very poor decisions made on the ground by Bremer and Rundsfeldt with no consultation with the State Department or even the National Security Advisor. Our ground troops are paying the price. And once again I ask, why?
The details of the Iraqi conflict are very convoluted and few people outside of a few Middle Eastern scholars really can explain the myriad of factions and religious organizations involved and how they interact and conflict with each other. I sympathize General Patreaus. He has been put in a very untenable position and one that has no clear cut definition of victory. Eliminating those that claim allegiance to Bin Laden will not end the conflict. The Sunni Shiite rivalry has a religious basis that will never go away and there is nothing we can do to end it other than arming both side to a stand off. This appears to be our strategy in An Wahr. The Kurds stand apart from this conflict and have a stable territory but their own zealots harass Turkey causing us another headache. They will be left at peace by the Sunni and Shiite only until one or the other gains the upper hand over the remainder of the country then they will come knocking on the Kurds door. Or perhaps the Turks will come knocking, particularly if they abandon the non-secular society founded by Ataturk.
Ataturk founded modern Turkey by ruthlessly knocking heads together (or off) of any religious leader who opposed him. We here in the United States have always maintained the separation of religion from government and have enjoyed tremendous freedom and prosperity. We tend to support non-secular leaders for the same reason. One immediate example comes to mind, the Shah of Iran. He was installed by us and supported by us. To maintain power both Ataturk and the Shah did things that Americans were and are uncomfortable with today. There was once such a person in Iraq. His name was Saddam. We supported him against Iran with weapons and equipment as well as intelligence I suspect. This was after he had done some of those things (gassing the Kurds)which we are uncomfortable with today and we knew it even then. So once again I ask a question, why did we let this man invade Kuwait in the first place and then why did we depose him when he was well contained?
Politicians are about getting elected. George Bush is a politician and he has used fear and attacks on others as too weak to wage war to continue his agenda. If this conflict is so important and as we all know if will take a long time to resolve, why has he not raised taxes, increased the force structure and instituted the draft. Rather he has cut taxes and just recently asked for an insufficient force structure increase. In addition he has abridged the personal freedoms of all Americans and condoned torture that I at least was taught was unconscionable. His administration is at the minimum incompetent and at the worst criminal. Either way it is every American’s duty to remain vigilant both from external as well as internal threats. Incompetent or criminal, this administration deserves to be asked hard questions and not unreasoning acceptance of its statements and rational. Our way of doing this has always been through politicians and the press. This is American democracy at work. Please do not scorn it, embrace it, the truth will become apparent.
No comments:
Post a Comment