The invasion of Iraq has been a very sticky issue for quite a while now. The blatant bravado that the US has exhibited in plodding its military might through the sovereign state of Iraq, the absolute disregard of human rights that has been witnessed by the world due to this colonialistic endeavor, will go down in history. The question is, will it go down in history as a good incident or bad? Of course, some people say that wars can never go down in history as good incidents. However, if you carefully consider the ramifications of the US's (mis)deeds in Iraq, and if you speculate on the reasons of the US's invasion of Iraq, you will realize that this just might be the one 'war' that will go down in history as a good thing for the free world.
Before you come to my house with an AK-47, hear me out. There are many facets to this issue. Let us start with some historical precedents that the then Soviet Union has set. From 1979 to 1989, the Soviet Union tried to gain military control of Afghanistan. The reason for this was that the Soviet Union had vested interests in Afghanistan. Neighboring Iran and Pakistan, Afghanistan was a great country to control for the Soviet Union in order to increase its Communistic influence into western as well as eastern Asia. Moreover, in the 1950's, the Soviet Union had invested much into Afghanistan by way of laying highways and irrigation canals. Due to this, there existed a puppet communist government in Kabul. However, this government was losing popular support due to its communist backing. The 'godless' and centralized communist principles were alien to the Afghan's strict and orthodox Islamic practices. Therefore, in order to maintain a semblance of security and to show its military might, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan with its own troops. They failed miserably. In the decade-long war that followed, the Soviets lost many billions of dollars worth airplanes and helicopter gunships as well as countless military personnel. In the end, in 1989, Gorbachev buckling under world pressure, not to mention pressure on the Soviets' economy, decided to pull out of Afghanistan. Therefore, we can see how a superpower, with blatant disregard to norms can invade a country to suit its own needs.
The US was very lucky during the invasion of Iraq. It had, so to speak, a semblance of a legitimate reason to invade. That being, there was a tyrant in power in Iraq; and he was, allegedly, developing Weapons of Mass Destruction which he would ultimately utilize to wipe out the population of Israel and the US. This established the basis of the very raison d'etre of the US's rationale of invading Iraq. Moreover, Saddam Hussein had the misfortune of being the adventurous leader who had invaded Kuwait in 1990. Therefore, when the US asked the UN for permission to invade Iraq, I had thought that the UN would sanction the military action without another thought. I was pleasantly surprised when, in fact, the UN didn't ratify the proposal. On the contrary, countries like Japan and Germany openly opposed this proposal. The only European power that actually supported the US was the UK. Despite showing 'damning' evidence, the US was not able to garner the UN's support to invade Iraq. I suspect that it was never the intention of the US to get UN support. This is because, the only real reason that the US invaded Iraq was to gain hegemony over it.
That Iraq was being ruled by a dictator who was allegedly developing WMDs only worked in the US administration's favor. The threat, nay just the thought, of being attacked by WMDs like biological, chemical or even nuclear weapons instilled a morbid fear of Saddam Hussein in the minds of the US population. The congress, which only represents the population, granted billions of dollars to the administration in order to carry out one of the best thought out and executed coups de grace of the 21st century. The real reason in the US's invasion of Iraq, I think, has been nothing but petroleum. The US is the world's largest consumer of petroleum. The daily consumption of petroleum in the US would be enough to feed the oil requirements of most of north Africa for several months. The total dependence of the US population on petroleum has been fueled in the past by cheap oil from the middle east.
However, the end of cheap oil has already occured. A person would have been laughed at 4 years ago if he/she would have said that the price of petrol in 4 years would be as it is right now. The oil from the middle east no longer flows like water. In another 50 years, this flow will become a small trickle. I believe the Bush administration has acted with great foresight in invading Iraq now so that when the trickle makes petroleum products very hard to come by, the US will have military and political presence in an area of the Earth that has the maximum concentration of it! Now, I don't say that it's not wrong that the US has acted in such a way, but I only say that the US has acted in its own interests. And therefore, I thank you, Mr. Bush, for epitomizing greed. What is a few lakh Iraqi lives in front of US interests?
3 comments:
Since the man who has this nack of reading blogs before everyone( that caso Marvadi) is dormant, I decided to put in my two cents on this topic
1.Though it is a great tactical move, one which only a stubborn country like the US can make, it is not going as easy as expected. The soldiers, though they are waging the war with American pride instilled in them, are still confused over the very necessity of laying down their lives hence the killer punch is lacking.And it is a universal fact that the US sucks at man to man war. So few lakh Iraqi lives are not the only ones..but the casualties also include a few hundred thousands of American soldiers' lives.
2.Since we are thinking of a move which will pay rich dividends in the next 50 years, I would also like to believe however utopian it may sound, that there could be an alternate source of fuel.Or maybe we wont need oil from the middle east to drive the vehicles all over the world..thus fully negating and reducing to shambles the very purpose of this bloddy war.
Its no rocket science to decipher that US invaded Iraq for the sole purpose of oil unlike the image that purports it to be an altruist. What also shocked me was the fact which I came to know from Lookateeem's dad is that US is using Iraq as a test bed to check on its new weaponry and war heads. This was quite a shock for me as I never contemplated such a heinous act on the part of the US. Putting all these points to perspective, its an all gain for the US of A.
P.S. Added to this is the historical fact that an American president at war has never lost elections...food for though eh?
fanclub bambi @X@ foreplay download @X@ wet bukkake tugjob @X@ bambi pass @X@ daizie soft tits @X@ squirts jo @X@ ejaculaion galleries @X@ ejacul candy @X@ putas en alzira @X@ contacto en video @X@ leica camara @X@ opearl videos @X@ chochos frescos avi @X@ perras cuernavaca @X@ squirt mpegs mature @X@ cytherea squirt vids @X@ handjob forums vivien @X@ strokejobs xxx spanish @X@ tugjob videos teacher @X@ olimpia ubikacja @X@ miziac ciocia @X@ lampucery podryw podrywacze @X@
Post a Comment