With Special Guest...James Eastley
Posted by Jason Easley on 07.20.2007
In his first piece for 411, new Politics contributor James Eastley discusses why we continue to fight in Iraq, and what the long term consequences of this strategic decision might be.
Introduction:
The world today is at a crucial turning point. Never before in human history has so much information been available. The majority of those reading this column are located in the US. I am however, located on a small island in the middle of the Irish Sea. The information is available instantly with the only block being the speed of your equipment. We have become saturated in information. Within 5 minutes, a computer, and a decent internet connection and you will have the ability to not only get a fairly accurate up to date portrait of a nation's political scene, but as importantly the economic status, key personalities, and even nuclear capabilities.
Where does this leave us? How then do we sift through all that information to find the relevant information? Most of the information in the papers today is useless, and only a few key articles will ever point us in the right direction. This is not to suggest that we are predicting anything, more that the focus of information gives us an idea of what to expect.
In the New York Times, there were 2 recent articles that caught my attention, the first was from a US general in Iraq:
I will take a chance that you don't read them and simply say despite a lot of crap, all they are really trying to do post pone the inevitable American withdrawal from Iraq. Importantly, and this is key, is that they are suggesting delaying the decision until next year. These are deliberate attempts to use any and all possible means to delay withdrawal. The question is why? Why would they at this point continue to press for people to stay? What possible good is there in fighting in Iraq? Prevent a civil war? Do Americans really consider Iraqi lives to be inherently more important than American?
Could it be that there is more to this than meets the eye? Of course, while George Bush is not the most intelligent man in the universe, he has some incredibly intelligent, albeit twisted advisors. The UK has in the last 3 years suffered a number of terrorist attacks, while the US has escaped unscathed. Of the two nations, we all know which is the more detested and the yet the UK has been the target ~ why?
In my opinion while the UK does have a military presence in Iraq, our operation style is completely different to that of the US. This means that to attack a UK patrol is less likely to be successful in its desired mission of undermining public opinion, and just as importantly is less likely to inflict casualties.
The US administration is more concerned with keeping troops in the field so that it can keep attention focused on killing American soldiers, rather than civilians. The US presence in the Middle East gives every Islamic fundamentalist the opportunity to fight Americans face to face. Thus the likelihood of a terrorist attack becomes less likely. Bush is not concerned really with Iraqis; he is however, concerned about a second terrorist attack on his watch. With troops in Iraq, he can sleep safely knowing that it is unlikely that terrorists will strike, and importantly the domestic security services can at present cope with the current level of activity.
There is a long term strategic problem with this method of operation. The US is training more and more fundamentalists how to fight, and is doing more to recruit them each and every day. In fact, with each day that passes, not only does the cost of the war increase, but once the fight is over, these men will be better trained and educated in the "Art of War" and as such they are becoming more and more dangerous by the day.
Once the Iraq War is over, what will all those men do next? Sit back get out their pipes and smoke? Or will they simply find other ways to take the fight to the Americans? At what point do you draw the line and say… enough is enough? Before you have given the enemy enough combat experience to actually surpassed the troops rotating in and out of the battle field or after?
STAY CURRENT