The Philosophers of Chaos Reap A Whirlwind (Iraq policy)

The philosophers of chaos reap a whirlwind

William Pfaff IHT
Washington's utopians

PARIS The intensification of violence in Iraq is the logical outcome of the Bush administration's choice in 2001 to treat terrorism as a military problem with a military solution - a catastrophic oversimplification.
.
Choosing to invade two Islamic states, Afghanistan and Iraq, neither of which was responsible for the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, inflated the crisis, in the eyes of millions of Muslims, into a clash between the United States and Islamic society.
.
The two wars did not destroy Al Qaeda. They won it new supporters. The United States is no more secure than it was before.
.
The wars opened killing fields in two countries that no one knows how to shut down, with American forces themselves increasingly the victims. This was not supposed to happen.
.
The killing was one way in September 2001: Al Qaeda killed Americans and others in New York and Washington. Later in 2001 and in 2002, the killing was overwhelmingly in the other direction. Taliban soldiers, Al Qaeda members and Afghan bystanders were the victims, in uncounted numbers.
.
This year began the same way, but now things have changed. Americans are no longer attacking Iraq from the unreachable sanctuaries provided by technological superiority and command of the air. They are on the ground, among 23 million Iraqis, the objects of elusive and unidentifiable attacks. This is what the U.S. Army has sought to avoid ever since the Vietnam War.
.
There is no victory in sight, not even a definition of victory....>> MORE

http://www.iht.com/articles/107407.html

I've been saying it was the wrong decision since Oct. 2001, but initially thought the US would get it 'out of their system' by attacking Afghanistan and then we would really work on bringing terrorists to justice (in US courts).

The Taliban controlled Afghanistan, and harbored al Queda. There is absolutely no question of that. To write that "neither of which was responsible for the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001" completely undermines this author's credibility.

In fact, I would argue that Dubya's dubious Iraq Adventure is detracting the United States from its proper role in the reconstruction of Afghanistan - whose people, and especially its women, suffered from even greater repression and tyranny than those under Hussein's control.

...that the author undermines his credibility by stating that Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11. They harbored al Qaeda.

I also agree that once we decided to intervene militarily in Afghanistan, we should have made great efforts to leave the place better than we found it.

But I think it is still debatable whether we should have intervened. The initial diplomatic efforts, basically arrogant demands to the Taliban, had no chance of success. I don't know if it was possible with mature diplomacy to get the Taliban to hand over bin Laden and his terrorists -- I'm just saying a good faith effort was not made.

I'm also saying that the only justification for intervention was self-defense -- we were attacked and the attackers were being harbored. Invading a sovereign nation to change their internal affairs (absent genocide) is something we should not be so willing to undertake. Even if we left Iraq alone and focused entirely on creating a free democratic nation in Afghanistan -- with help from our then-supportive allies -- it would have been a daunting task, costly, long term, and with the possibility that the beneficiaries would resent our presence more than accept what we were trying to give.

IMHO, we should only use force as a last option. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration doesn't appear to be very good at, or interested in, diplomacy or consensus-building. They apparently weren't watching when the Soviets ran into a buzzsaw in Afghanistan - or maybe they just think that America is so naturally superior that the Soviet experience can't happen to us.

But, if we were going to do it, Afghanistan was the appropriate place. Iraq is utterly "a bridge too far", and I suspect it will eventually be the undoing of Dubya and his Administration.

is that Saudi Arabia was the sole nation-state behind 9-11, he's not denying that Afghanistan harbored AQ

We don't know the whole truth.

Recently there was a blackout in the Northeast caused by an apparently incompetent utility. Al-Queda took responsibility for this event, which on the face of it dows not seem plausable.

This could be a psy-ops tactic, or maybe they are not as credible as we think they are. Everyone assumes that the 9/11 attack took massive planning and oraganization. What if it didn't?

What if the real mastermind of 9/11, died on 9/11? All it could have taken was one charismatic leader and 18 impressionable followers. If you were to tell me that Mohammad Atta, not Osama Bin-Laden was the true mastermind, I would be open to consider that suggestion.

Atta could have received funding from Osama, but that dosn't make Osama the leader. It's curious how Osama went from "Priority number one" to "Not a priority" within six months. And a year after that we go to war against one of Osama's enemies. Very curious indeed.

Afganistan was because the taliban wouldn't let us run a pipeline across that country. In fact, it had been planned before 9/11. Has that been discredited?

...who nurtured and protected bin Laden and is still doing so. The pitifully poor Afghan government was and is only capable of what its sponsors allow in terms of projection. Afghanistan was no threat to America. Accusing the central government of Afghanistan for "harboring" those in rugged hinterlands is a bit of a reach. The government was toppled because it stood in the way of some energy service contracts. The regime change as it was turned out to be a major miscalculation for the neocons. They haven't done a thing right yet. After all they are only doing the bidding of corporate CEOs and PR specialists for defense contractors and the oil industry who don't know which end the bullet comes from. But they do know how to rig a bid. It's the best and the brightest. Deja vu all over again!

up. We have reincarnated the Great Crusades. We will suffer for this, in ways we don't yet imagine. Robert Byrd saw it......he tried to tell us. They wouldn't listen to him. Wisdom doesn't matter.......only might. Just like Rome just like every campaign that has gone into the Arab world and tried to dominate them on their own territory........For centuries.

No one listens.