Friday, September 24, 2004
"The Secret History of the Iraq War" -- remarks
"The war in Iraq is far from over. The conduct of the war to date has exposed Washington’s failure to grasp the profound differences between the United States and the Arab and Muslim world. Put simply, America fought the war in English, in a region that marches to Arabic drums. The United States has repeatedly demonstrated the most basic misunderstanding of the Iraqi theater, the intricacies of he Iraqi population, and the role of Islam in shaping regional events and grassroots militancy. … While a majority of the American government and public considered the war in Iraq an effort to disarm Saddam Hussein, the entire Arab and Muslim world saw it differently. And today, while the United States is attempting to shape a postwar government in Iraq, the Muslim world is preparing for a fateful jihad over the shape of the postwar world. … The conflict to come will be a total war for all involved.
-- Yossef Bodansky, The Secret History of the Iraq War (New York: ReganBooks, 2004): intro.
No review. Just a remark or two. I read on this when I need a break from Reformation studies. (The late medieval period in Europe and modern Iraq have much in common, actually: Warlords, fiefdoms, shifting allegiances, no real “state” or “nation” as we understand the term today.) The Secret History outlines just how determined the Bush administration was to go to war in Iraq – come hell on earth or high water in the Euphrates. All the last-minute “attempts” to avoid war – on both sides, to be fair – were to set up strategies for winnowing friends from enemies after the fighting. The book also outlines just how alone the United States is in the insane idea that democracy can be installed anywhere – and how alone we are in this fight.
--ER
About the author:
“Yossef Bodansky has been the director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare for more than a decade. He is the longtime director of research at the International Strategic Studies Association and senior editor for the Defense and Foreign Affairs group of publications. Bodansky has been a visiting scholar at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, as well as a former senior consultant for the U.S. departments of Defense and State. The author of the number one New York Times bestseller Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America, he makes his primary home in Washington, D.C., and travels extensively to the Middle East and around the world."
END
-- Yossef Bodansky, The Secret History of the Iraq War (New York: ReganBooks, 2004): intro.
No review. Just a remark or two. I read on this when I need a break from Reformation studies. (The late medieval period in Europe and modern Iraq have much in common, actually: Warlords, fiefdoms, shifting allegiances, no real “state” or “nation” as we understand the term today.) The Secret History outlines just how determined the Bush administration was to go to war in Iraq – come hell on earth or high water in the Euphrates. All the last-minute “attempts” to avoid war – on both sides, to be fair – were to set up strategies for winnowing friends from enemies after the fighting. The book also outlines just how alone the United States is in the insane idea that democracy can be installed anywhere – and how alone we are in this fight.
--ER
About the author:
“Yossef Bodansky has been the director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare for more than a decade. He is the longtime director of research at the International Strategic Studies Association and senior editor for the Defense and Foreign Affairs group of publications. Bodansky has been a visiting scholar at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, as well as a former senior consultant for the U.S. departments of Defense and State. The author of the number one New York Times bestseller Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America, he makes his primary home in Washington, D.C., and travels extensively to the Middle East and around the world."
END
Comments:
<< Home
Question: If installing democracy is an insane idea, exactly how do we encourage it? Surely it's better for the world if all the nations are democracies. I'm not saying we can or should go over and force one on any people, but how do we encourage a nation to choose it? That's the big question, and I don't have an answer. But I don't think war is.
I've been twisting this around in my head all day. I keep coming back to tribal government before the arrival of white settlers. I think they did fairly well governing their own nations without the model of democracy. Sure there were inter-tribal wars, but they made sense on some level, depending on the nature of the tribes involved.
This is on my mind a lot because of Oklahoma State Question 712, the Education and Jobs referendum. I'm having a hard time figuring out how a state (Oklahoma) can decide it will take a portion of a tribal nation's gaming revenues to pay for the state's schools. It's also supposed to help shore up the horse industry -- 50,000 jobs in various horse-related businesses.
My questions are: 1) What happened to tribal sovreignty? We sure couldn't vote to take gambling money from Nevada or Canada or England or any other government. We still recognize tribal nations when it comes to smoke shops and car tags. And tribes created their gaming centers to support their own governments.
2) What happened to free enterprise and capitalism in the gaming industry? What happened to all the assurances that casinos and racetracks would have no impact on each other? Why should the tribal nations bail out the white horsemen?
Sorry, these are just some problems I'm having with Americans in general accepting that others have a right to govern themselves in ways unlike white Americans. It seems as though we believe EVERYONE has to go to a ballot box on Nov. 2 and vote or their self-governance is invalid.
This is on my mind a lot because of Oklahoma State Question 712, the Education and Jobs referendum. I'm having a hard time figuring out how a state (Oklahoma) can decide it will take a portion of a tribal nation's gaming revenues to pay for the state's schools. It's also supposed to help shore up the horse industry -- 50,000 jobs in various horse-related businesses.
My questions are: 1) What happened to tribal sovreignty? We sure couldn't vote to take gambling money from Nevada or Canada or England or any other government. We still recognize tribal nations when it comes to smoke shops and car tags. And tribes created their gaming centers to support their own governments.
2) What happened to free enterprise and capitalism in the gaming industry? What happened to all the assurances that casinos and racetracks would have no impact on each other? Why should the tribal nations bail out the white horsemen?
Sorry, these are just some problems I'm having with Americans in general accepting that others have a right to govern themselves in ways unlike white Americans. It seems as though we believe EVERYONE has to go to a ballot box on Nov. 2 and vote or their self-governance is invalid.
Trixie: The tribes have entered a compact with the state on this casino-horse track deal. The state is not trying to erode their sovereignty, at least not in this instance. And "free enterprise" is a myth, in the classic sense; it's an idea that animates discussion and informs governance, which itself is almost oxymoronic: "governing free enterprise." But that's the way it is. My bread and milk are affordable because of farm subsidies. I can live with less freedom of enterprise when it comes to ag production -- that's why I say I'm a lib when it comes to economics. We the People, in the form of state and local governments, act as a check on free enterprise all the time -- and I think it's usually a legitimate use of governmental power.
Visotor: Welcome. I'm to the right of the president on Iraq, in some ways. We need to send more troops, not fewer, partly because they may literally have to fight themselves out of this mess.
Visotor: Welcome. I'm to the right of the president on Iraq, in some ways. We need to send more troops, not fewer, partly because they may literally have to fight themselves out of this mess.
Courtney! Sorry! Welcome, Courtney! I couldn't recall yer name, and the way the blogger pages work, I couldn't see it when I was writing the above response. Welcome, Courtney. Come on back, anytime. :-)
-- ER
-- ER
Off-topic, but had to comment...
Interestingly, in California they tell us our "bread and milk" are affordable because of illegal alien workers. I guess the California farmers don't get subsidies because we have illegals to relieve us of that burden? Is there a way to find out just what exactly is keeping American life affordable?
Speaking of affordable, four dollars a gallon is affordable?? Will it help if I ante up the extra ten cents for my lettuce? Heck, what will they give me (or not take from me) if I bake my own bread?
Post a Comment
Interestingly, in California they tell us our "bread and milk" are affordable because of illegal alien workers. I guess the California farmers don't get subsidies because we have illegals to relieve us of that burden? Is there a way to find out just what exactly is keeping American life affordable?
Speaking of affordable, four dollars a gallon is affordable?? Will it help if I ante up the extra ten cents for my lettuce? Heck, what will they give me (or not take from me) if I bake my own bread?
<< Home