|
Bush Provoking a war against
Iraq
US president Bush is bent on provoking a war against Iraq, according
to him, because Saddam Hussein has biological, chemical and nuclear
weapons that can be used (note - only "can", not "has
been used") against his neighbours and his Iraqi people.
Bush claims, and Tony Blair supports him without further argument nor
evidence, that Saddam has been developing chemical, nuclear and biological
weapons ever since the devastating blow dealt on Iraq during the Gulf
war of eleven years ago. Iraq, as the only nation ever so harassed,
must therefore allow US-picked UN inspectors into the country
a whole decade after the Gulf war; irrespective of which Bush will still
bomb Iraq anyway - with or without UN mandate and
with or without the full support of US allies.
All the said weapons are available to Israel from joint efforts with
the US, the same Israel that has the most weapons in the whole of the
Middle East region; Israel that continues to escalate its crisis with
the Palestinians and humiliate, torture and disarm the Palestinian authority;
Israel that disallowed UN entry into Palestinian territory;
Israel that has defied UN resolutions many more times
than Iraq. The moral destitution in this attitude of Bush is too obvious
to be our focus here. Rather than sensibly attend to this highly critical
Israeli crisis, Bush chooses to create yet a more serious one in the
region by starting a war against Iraq. Back
to top
Questions on Bush's claims.
Before looking at the real facts of this case, common sense raises a
number of important questions. Even if those claims by Bush are assumed
to be true (mind you - his impulsiveness plus his less than holy attitude
towards hard facts do not justify this assumption), what qualifies
Bush to be the best person to declare war on Iraq for this purpose
on behalf of the Middle East region, the Iraqi people and the rest of
the world? Why should Bush take the law into his own hands; the
same Bush who has consistently unilaterally said no to every constructive
world initiative including several UN initiatives and international
agreements which were designed specifically to benefit mankind and promote
global peace?
Of all countries in the world, why is it the USA which has
more of these very destructive weapons than Iraq and
indeed than any other country for that matter? Why the same USA that
is reputable for having used these and other weapons against
her own citizens and against her very own dedicated soldiers
who were deliberately exposed to nuclear radiation as test rabbits
in a US desert? The Gulf war syndrome among allied soldiers returning
from Desert Storm, and the nuclear and chemical weapon tests in which
which US soldiers were used last century, are cases in point. To date,
the USA is the only country to have ever used napalm and nuclear
bombs against another nation. Victims in Japan, Vietnam and Cambodia
are living evidence of this. Back
to top
The Illegitimacy of Bush's
war.
The very chance of any legitimacy for a war on Iraq by Bush is nullified
by his self avowed declaration that he needs no UN support, nor
Allied support, nor the support of the region as such, to start his
senseless war. As a window dressing measure, he gets Blair to join him
in a press statement that only repeats what Bush had earlier unilaterally
declared; thus making Blair appear like a stupid copycat
who is incapable of developing an independent own opinion on such a
critical issue. The rest of the world has gotten the picture if Blair
has not. And, for heaven's sake, why should Bush turn this matter into
a whole war precisely at this very moment that he even refuses to
attend nor speak to the 189 nations gathered at the World Summit
on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg? And why eleven whole
years after the end of the Gulf war? Have the ordinary people
of Iraq not suffered enough in eleven years of economic sanctions,
repeated bombardment on the excuses of no-fly-zone enforcement and continuous
stigmatization by the US? Back
to top
Pseudo-justification
betrays democracy
To create pseudo-justification of his shaky claims for a senseless war
on Iraq, Bush suddenly throws in mendacious concerns for democracy as
if he himself is an angel on democracy; when the whole world knows on
what shaky, tricky grounds he manoeuvred US elections to get
himself into the White House. Of all things, how can Bush call it democracy
when he lines up the claimant to Iraq's former monarchy as the
candidate to replace Saddam Hussein? That Bush, a US president, labels
such a thing "democracy" is a blatant betrayal of the
principles of the founding fathers of the United States of America.
It is indeed an insult on the intelligence of modern peace-loving man
and an abuse of the Iraqi nation's right to self determination.
Back
to top
Bush
Bullying Iraq:
Just in case the situation on the ground does not yet convincingly justify
a war, Bush and his men have already started to deploy their own intrigues
to provoke war and to create their own justification for it.
Suddenly, a whole hundred US and British fighter planes are hitting
Iraq ostensibly for no-fly-zone violations. Any idiot knows that these
specific strikes are intended to disable Iraq before the real war begins
and to provoke a reaction by Iraq which can then be blown out of proportions
via the media. Just to spur the reluctant German Chancellor into
supporting Bush against Iraq, at the instigation of the FBI, certain
Moslems in Germany are suddenly "caught" with materials that
can possibly be used to make weapons to attack US locations within
Germany and Europe.
To make it all seem plausible, the suspects are said to have pictures
of the most wanted terrorist under the sun. In short, mere possession
of the pictures already makes the suspects guilty; at least to
those stupid enough to believe the lies. Thank God, ordinary citizens
of the world have more sense than could be so misled. France, Germany,
China, Russia, even OPEC countries who are predominantly
from the region itself and most other nations oppose a new war on Iraq
because they see no grounds for it. Of course nobody will be
stupid enough to think that Iraq is going to attack US soil over such
a great distance half way around the globe, contrary to claims
by the Bush administration. Back
to top
"Oily-garchy"
- the real secret driver behind Bush's war on Iraq?
The primary force behind George Bush's ascendance to presidential power
in the US comes from the political and heavy financial support he and
his family enjoy from the US defence lobby and the oil lobby.
The power of "oily-garchy" in the hands of these lobby
bulwarks in the US is not new. The older former president Bush already
enjoyed its riches before later deploying it for his son George W Bush.
Contrary to the propaganda of the last decade, the Gulf war against
Iraq was fought not so much out of US concern for democracy
in the region. Neither in Kuwait nor in Saudi Arabia have the ruling
monarchies ever hidden their unshakeable grip on their countries
- before, during and after the Gulf war. The military dictator
currently supported by the USA in Pakistan actually ousted a democratically
elected president. The Taliban government recently bombed out of Afghanistan
by George Bush in the name of "terrorism", was democratically
elected. Nor was it the love of the Kuwaiti people that
prompted the USA to drive back Iraqi forces when they invaded Kuwait.
The real motives of the US presidency for the Gulf war then
are the same ones now; only magnified by the personal psychological
problems of Bush junior. George W has a sickening desire for
attention - public attention, especially to disprove his evident
lack of intellectual inner strength. The oil and defence lobbyists know
that and exploit it to the full. Hence they see to it that a strong
orchestration of his shallow pronouncements hit high publicity
and by so doing awakens public American support for Bush. And all that,
without the slightest public mention of the real interests behind his
craze; for that must remain secret. Back
to top
Pushing the world back to
rearmament
To understand the nature of the real secret drivers behind Bush's impulsive
monologue declarations, the sequence of those declarations should be
recalled. No sooner did George W. Bush come to power than he surprised
the world with his unilateral declaration of US withdrawal
from the international disarmament agreements that had so
painfully been achieved in ending the Cold War last century. Against
protests by US allies in western Europe, and against Russian opposition,
George Bush pressed on for the US to develop new defence systems that
far outweigh anything within the capability of even the joint combination
of the rest of the world put together.
Towards this end, Bush has now increased America's defence
spending by no less than 50% in this peace time when there is no
war threat from any other super power. Neither Russia nor China poses
a threat to the US. Central Europe is more united and
peaceful than at any time in history. But the avarice of the US defence
industry is far more decisive in these matters than the genuine low
level of need for weaponry. As a result, even when there is no war to
consume their high defence output, they seek to justify high defence
spending simply by developing a strategy of propaganda to create
wars. Back
to top
Harvesting
from Public Euphoria
A great opportunity to fuel this propaganda was provided by the attacks
on New York's World Trade Centre twin towers and Washington DC on September
11 2001. As the media euphoria around that event suddenly turned the
erstwhile rather unpopular mayor Giuliani of New York into a
god-like hero overnight, this president Bush, who months
earlier had been informed of the impending attack, did
rather timely and cowardly go into hiding just before the attack,
remaining in hiding for no less than three days after the attack.
Bush neither took steps to prevent the Al -Quaida attack, nor
did he undertake any genuine initiative immediately after it happened.
By the third day when the coast was clear, Bush realized the immense
popularity gains he could harvest from the event by simply playing
on the public emotions after the event just as already demonstrated
by the New York city mayor. Hence George Bush came out of hiding with
a number of arrogant monologue declarations, throwing in words of heroism
and effectively pressurizing the media and allied country leaders
into support for "the war on terrorism".
Mainly out of a sense of commitment not to miss a chance to repay
the US for help in the past, (world wars, US-Marshall Plan, NATO unity),
western allies got carried into a war against poor, weak, exhausted
Afghanistan that had barely survived decades of war with
Russia and internal strife. Whereas a single day of bombing by
the mighty US, alone the world's most powerful defence machinery, the
only super power, and with the most formidable technological
weapons in all history, was enough to knock off the Al Quaida terrorists.
Nevertheless, to avoid being isolated by other world leaders, Bush and
his defence lobby cajolled tens of other foreign governments
into actually participating in US "war on terrorism".
The war target shifted from just Al-Quaida members to
the Talibans and the whole official sovereign government of Afghanistan
and all its forces; the ostensible catch-net later widening to
include any organization and anyone known to have ever had any
contacts whatsoever with the Talibans. All financial assets suspected
of any possible links to them were frozen. Anybody with any links to
their members: families, relatives, old school friends,
overseas blood relations and even teachers anywhere were subject
to arrest in several western countries. American citizens with
any heritage that could be traced to any Taliban members were subject
to arrest in a separate process outside the regular court
system. The safety from an abuse of personal liberty that US constitution
had guaranteed for over two centuries, was suddenly now withdrawn for
Americans of Arabic origin, identifiable Moslems and whoever
expressed opinions that favour "terrorists". All and anyone
can be offered on the alters of the Bush administration to the gods
of the defence-oil oligarchy. Serious analysis or mention of
the root causes of terrorism - unfair, dehumanizing treatment,
outright mass deception and gross inequity - is taboo
to the Bush administration. Unfortunately, some in main stream journalism
accept that. Back
to top
Harnessing
for insatiable defence lobby appetite
The tremendous success of the drive for "war on terrorism"
in commanding public awe and media attention, so overwhelmed Bush, that
it blinded his vision on other internal American problems while
also prompting him to develop total disdain and disregard for international
opinion on any other matter than his "war on terrorism".
The defence industry has won immensely in its lobby, but
as an industrial machinery, the lobby system must continually be fed
ever more offers because of its insatiable appetite. Hence other
arena's must be created to maintain its growth. It is obvious that where
defence goes, energy consumption flows in wild tumultuous volumes. Fuel
consumption by the military in action, is more golden for the oil
and energy industry than gold itself.
So it came to be that the oil lobby realized that the lobby dynamics
now in action, could be harnessed for yet other areas of interest
that have for a while eluded them. That is where Iraq and Iran
provide effective targets, since these two nations remained impenetrable
to US oil and defence industries. Of these two, Iraq is the more vulnerable
because of public memory of the Gulf war and the reputation of Saddam
Hussein. Hence, current Bush administration's focus on Iraq. Meanwhile,
by the time Iraq is beaten into a pulp, some slogan will be trumpeted
which can serve to warm up public anger against Iran as the next US
active war target. The mention of North Korea as another US war
target is squarely within the logic of that country's defence spending
falling entirely outside the domain of US defence lobby groups.
Back
to top
What
are the real gains from the wars of George Bush?
With the removal of the Taliban government and the installation of the
new Bush-selected Afghanistan president, the development of the
huge Afghani gas and oil resources are open to no one else than
American oil business. That is a huge long-term financial gain.
The local cash-flows that those oil and gas resources may generate for
the Afghans can then be channelled to pay for American defence support
of that country. Naturally, all that happens behind the glare
of the media. If Sadam Hussein is removed through a US-provoked
war, just like in Afghanistan, US oil business will gain a strong
foothold in Iraqi oil resources and its associated hugely generated
local cashflow. That cashflow will then be harnessed to pay for
US defence support of the new to emerge Iraqi government. As extra gain
- a fine dessert on this war-meal - the US will also get access to the
very oil fields in the very border area between Kuwait and Iraq for
which Saddam Hussein attacked Kuwait eleven years ago. Back
to top
Political folly on a
global scale Back
to top
The big lie is, of course, that instead of stating his interest in the
oil- and defence industry harvests of wars against Iraq and Iran, Bush
fools the world with empty slogans about "war on terrorism",
defence of liberty and freedom and concern for world peace.Until the
advent of George Bush, a slogan like "war on terrorism" was
just like "war on hunger"; which never meant a full-fledged
international warfare with bombs and fighters devastating defenceless,
innocent, civilian populations as France's president Chirac first
rightly noted before getting swept off in Bush's euphoria. What is amazing
is that many other country leaders actually ever fell victim
to this cheap deceit, to the extent of actually spending
their own scarce defence money in the process, and subjugating
their own national secret intelligence to American intelligence.
This has been political folly on a global scale indeed. But let
us see how long it takes some of these other country leaders to see
reality and admit it. A good number of them are already waking up
to see George Bush for what he really is - an arrogant, deceitful, selfish
attention-seeking fellow. Britain's Tony Blair will certainly be
the last to see the truth in this case. Back
to top.
Back
to top
|
