Bush's Choice: America or the Empire

Category: Americas, World Affairs Topics: Conflicts And War, George W. Bush, Iraq Views: 3231
3231

Deep down, U.S. President George W. Bush should grasp the seriousness of his debacle. If true, then he must also appreciate the time element in averting the worse-case scenario, which he, along with an increasingly alienated number of ideologues are imposing on their country.

Iraq is a multifaceted disaster, and its calamitous effects are hurting America on many levels. The number of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq is creeping up to the 2,000 mark. The figure of those wounded and maimed -- some permanently disabled -- is several folds higher.

This war is too costly. Hundreds of millions of dollars are diverted from the U.S. budget everyday to feed the war machine; good news for the Pentagon and the military establishment maybe, but not so good for the majority of Americans, especially the poorest among them.

The U.S. Army is stretched too thin, bogged down in a war gone awry. Many National Guard units, whose sole mission is to tend to the nation's needs in times of crisis, were deployed to Iraq. The consequences of such indiscretions were exhibited in the Katrina disaster to a humiliating degree.

Public opinion has been illustrative of Bush's heedless foreign-policy conduct. A recent CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll found that 67 percent of Americans disapprove of the way Bush is handling the situation in Iraq. The majority of Americans, according to the poll, want to see serious cuts in military spending and a diversion of resources to help in the post-Katrina rebuilding efforts.

But that is simply not feasible. The security in Iraq is deteriorating, and the insurgency is gaining momentum. All attempts to diminish the authenticity or magnitude of the resistance have failed. What's going on in Iraq is not the work of a few infiltrators, nor can it be narrowly defined according to ethnic classification or the character of one or a cluster of individuals.

If the war was a faltering empire's attempt to thrust itself in a highly strategic geopolitical location and thus gain control over precious energy sources, then it was a strategic blunder. It is threatening the stability of an entire region and also exposing the inadequacies of U.S. military capabilities.

If U.S. military strategists -- especially those close to the president -- possess the courage to extract lessons from history and recognize the complexity of the political reality in Iraq, they would undoubtedly conclude that the war in Iraq is simply unwinnable.

Knowing that the U.S. cannot prevail in the war, the Bush administration is focusing on winning time by diverting attention from Iraq with smoke screens. There was the "bringing democracy" to the Arab world charade, with its last episode being the elections mockery in Egypt. And before that was the frenzy over the Islamic madrassas and how they gives birth to "little terrorists" -- to use the outlandish term of one CNN journalist, and so forth.

But every smoke screen has eventually dispersed to reveal the same tragic reality that the White House is laboriously trying to conceal: Bush's war has no future strategy and no quantifiable objective. Once these two elements are removed, all that is left behind is war for the sake of war, a perpetual, endless military strife devoid of meaning except that cruelly inferred by an extremist zealot or a conceited ideologue. Evidently, the Bush constituency thrives on both.

Even a pompous president with a divine mission must recognize a disaster when he sees one. It is improbable that Bush actually believes his own rhetoric of a world full of promise, which he supposedly molded, whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Lebanon or Gaza.

Americans are distancing themselves from the conflict and the administration's inflated projections. Despite the duplicity and outright ignorance of the media, an estimated 300,000 antiwar protesters descended on Washington D.C. on Sept. 24, demanding an immediate end to the war in Iraq. 
They included representatives of 250 American families who lost loved ones in Iraq. Also coming in droves were hundreds of war veterans, many of whom became disabled in Iraq. They all came seeking answers, disclosure and an end to the incessant war madness that has engulfed their nation.

But Bush is unlikely to yield. He too has a crowd for which he cares deeply, convoluted interest groups that are a bizarre mix of business elites and corporate contractors, religious fanatics and top military brass.

Bush's immediate constituency is unified in its war agenda, each group for its own reasons. An immediate withdrawal from Iraq is an ideological defeat; an irreplaceable financial loss for some; an end, if temporarily, to unwarranted military interventionism and the injurious diminishment to America's political hegemony. Considering that occupying and controlling Iraq was the pinnacle of the Bush war advocates' infamous manifesto on how to "secure the realms" of an increasingly challenged empire, a withdrawal from Iraq would certainly be the end of that dream.

Yet staying in Iraq in a futile "hunt" for "terrorists" with an augmenting insurgency that is steadily engulfing the whole country is nothing like the envisaged "cakewalk" fantasy that also foresaw Iraqis showering the liberators with flowers and candy. Iraq has grown to become the empire's most dreadful nightmare.

This self-inflicted predicament presents Bush and his administration with two arduous options: to disown their commitment to the empire and to exit Iraq immediately, saving some face and an opportunity -- if only a meager one -- to manage the crisis they've helped create with the hope of reconciling with the majority of the American people, or to weather the Iraqi storm, hoping for a miracle before their ship is completely sunk.

The hundreds of thousands of Americans who marched on Washington in protest of Bush and his costly wars -- in fact the majority of the American people -- have made their voices loud and clear. Will Bush and his self-righteous ideologues listen, just for once?

Ramzy Baroud is a veteran Arab-American journalist. He teaches mass communication at Australia's Curtin University of Technology, Malaysia Campus

He is also the editor of the anthology: "Searching Jenin: Eyewitness Accounts of the Israeli Invasion."

To buy "Searching Jenin: Eyewitness Accounts of the Israeli Invasion" CLICK HERE

 


  Category: Americas, World Affairs
  Topics: Conflicts And War, George W. Bush, Iraq
Views: 3231

Related Suggestions

 
COMMENTS DISCLAIMER & RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
The opinions expressed herein, through this post or comments, contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. These are offered as a means for IslamiCity to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization. The IslamiCity site may occasionally contain copyrighted material the use of which may not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. IslamiCity is making such material available in its effort to advance understanding of humanitarian, education, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and such (and all) material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.


Older Comments:
SUSAN FROM USA said:
Perhaps you should remove the hyphen between Arab and American. You obviously have no idea of what America represents. Also, are you familiar with writing that contains fallacies? Perhaps, you claim to be an Arab-American just for the benefit of free speech.
2005-10-19

YAHYA BERGUM FROM USA said:
I know very little about matters such as "the elections mockery in Egypt" but Ramzy Baroud seems to have offered up a fairly bulletproof case against directionless U.S. military intervention (in the Middle East and elsewhere). That is of course unless the plan had from the very beginning been to promote a greater degree of revolutionary Islamic governance in Iraq (and possibly elsewhere). Not that I myself have a fundamental objection to such efforts. It merely seems a little strange for American politicians who seem to place a lot of emphasis on how others refer to themselves.

Also: Mary Lenn, for the most part I personally approve of what you seem to be trying to do. However, one of the last things I would like to see the Muslim community doing is building walls of resentment. But I do happen to think the community as a whole could profit by shunning superstition and pursuing education. Speaking of superstition, Mary Lenn, my thinking is huge storms which disrupt activities such as gambling, offshore banking and oil production more likely indicate the Almighty's views on those particular activities--rather than regarding some failure to support a foreign country's hostile expansion.
2005-10-16

HUDD D'AELIA FROM CANADA said:
Maybe I didn't quite get your message, Mary Lenn, in other words, what on earth are you trying to say? You just post unanswerable question to an audience that would like to have either a dialogue or some plausible statements that would cast a light on 'grey' areas of some equivocal episodes of our common experience. You appear like coming from behind and throwing your shaul on the table upsetting the domino arrangement. Deside what you want to advocate for and be honest enough not to act from under grotesque identity concealing masks. Where is your stand? Whom do you blame and why? What is your life philosopy and where does it fit in the America or the Empire? You have to decide, you cannot serve Mammon and God in the same time. The truth, more often, is not what we want to hear and usually is nasty and stinks, especially when it comes from the US administration.
So long, Mary, come back when you are a full fledged bird. Chick matters belong in the High School, dear.
2005-10-14

MARY LENN FROM UK said:
Dear Hudd d'Aelia,
When a sandstorm whipped up in the early stage of the Iraq war the Muslims said the US would be defeated. When Bam and Ismeit went 'bammed', the infidels poured aids and sent rescue missions. Similar to what you saw in Aceh and Pakistan. Muslim countries nether have the wherewithdals nor technologies to cope with challenges. Mullah Omar of the Telebans waved "Mohammed's cloak" on a rooftop before thousands and dared the US to attack Afganistan (if you didn't know) and Allah's wrath will befall the US. What happened to Mullah and the Telebans? The US, Russia and China (infidels) have blasted to space. Today, sadly, Muslims still blast themselves in the midst of defenceless men, women and children. Frankly, God doeesn't need mere mortals to fight for them. Surely he isn't that weak!
2005-10-14

IMRAN FROM USA, NY said:
Dear Mary

Why is it so that whenever a Muslim writes an article that challenges American Imperialism and Zionist Intrest, Evangelicals like your self put the blame on MUSLIMS. Why do you keep refering to past history which has nothing to do with this article. America's quagmire in Iraq was a punishment from ALLAH(swt). If i can recall, gasoline prices when up to almost $4 a gallon after Katrina. This was a punishment from Allah(swt) I believe because America was stealing Iraqi OIL, since I don't speak to God like W, only Allah (swt) knows. BTW you talk as if there are Islamic Governments in the Middle East, to refresh your memory there are NONE. The Middle East is ruled by dictators and Kings supported by the USA.
AMERICANS AND OTHER SECULAR SOCIETIES ARE AFRAID OF ISLAM AND ITS EXPOTENITIAL GROWTH.REMEMBER ARE RETURN IS TO ALLAH =GOD (SWT) THE ONENESS OF GOD NOT JESUS (PEACE BE UPON HIM). MARY READ YOUR BIBLE EITHER NEW OR OLD TESTEMENT,PROPHET MUHAMMED(PBUH)IS IN YOU TEXT NO JOKE!


2005-10-14

HUDD D'AELIA FROM CANADA said:
Mary Lenn you are the true personification of the concept of bigotry. ... On religious basis, Jesus,pbuh, said, "The sun shines over the righteous and the wicked as well. Calamities befall on the wicked and righteous the same." Jesus,pbuh, exemplified to the idiotic Jewish Pharasee sect God's wisdom in dealing out his blessings. Israel and her poodle USA are neither God nor His instruments. If you believed that, you are not different from the pagan Romans or barbarian Mongols. Both were brought down and so will be brought down Israel and USA as well. USSR thought they will last for ever and eventually the whole world will follow their form of religion, Communism. On scientific basis, natural dissasters are due to happen because of weather patterns and geological developments in the earth's crust. You don't need to be an Einstein to access and understand this kind of information. It is available in many places, try a big building that contains many books in the service of the public, it's called a 'Library'. The Arabs were not armed to their teeth, simply because they didn't have a war machine installed like Israel. The guns USSR traded to the Arabs were old and obsolete for the USSR herself, while Israel got the cream of the weaponry from their slave states, like USA, UK and the rest 0of those that traded humanity for imperialism. What do you have for brains Mary Lenn? Ask maybe your husband to explain to you, how is that that Israel is holding at bay the multitude of the Arabs? It is like the weakest crap-boy in the school bullies the big athletic kids because he's in cahoots with the drug-pusher and thus deemed very dangerous to deal with. The little crap-boy is Israel and the drug-pusher is USA. In your reckoning it seems that the lots work for the criminal and the little bully. Thus you care to say that this would be the blessings of God. According to you, maybe Al Capone was a prophet.
2005-10-13

MARY LENN FROM UK said:
Dear Imram, many strange things are happening these days. The massive tsunami that wipped out Aceh, a Muslim stronghold in Indonesia and the filth on the beaches of Thailand. The so-called God-protected Talebans who ran helter skelter for cover and vanished when America exerted its fury. Then it was Bam, in Iran; Ismeit in Turkey and now Pakistan. And when Bush pushed for the Gaza to be given up to the Arabs that's when God's wrath pounded New Orleans. Think about it. Tiny Israel went through 3 major war 3 times against its much bigger and numerically superior Arab nations. They Arabs were armed to the teeth with cutting-edge USSR technology. What happened?
2005-10-11

HASSAN FROM EGYPT said:
Nice article.
2005-10-10

AHMED FROM UK said:
.. Its so painfully obvious that you cant come up with any logical counter arguments. Let me ask why did your "god" allow Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to happen? You definetly have the edge on Nobel prizes....the ones for lying, mass murder and global terrorism.
Then again, considering that Bush claims that "god" told him to attack Iraq show you Americans for the brain dead lemmings that you are.
2005-10-10

IMRAN FROM USA said:
Mary Lenn - GROW UP

Article is very well written, very precise assessment about whats is happening in the United States of America.
2005-10-09

MARY LENN FROM UK said:
Why does Allah allow this to happen to Pakistan? Thousands die in the earthquake. There are a mere 12 Million Jews in the entire world yet they have received 164 Nobel Prizes. The Muslims number 1.4 Billion (with a very big "B")... or 117 times the number of Jews! Based upon this 117:1 Muslim-to-Jewish ratio, one might expect the Muslims to have 22,260 Nobel Laureates.
They have SIX! and one of them is Arafat the clown!
Note: Elias James Corey (Chemistry 1990), Peter Brian Medawar (Medicine 1960) and Ferid Mourad (Medicine 1998) are Nobel Prize winners but are Arab-Christians, not Muslims.

2005-10-09