Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Purpose of the Iraqi Insurgency

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:11 PM
Original message
The Purpose of the Iraqi Insurgency
Since the United States Army under the command of George W. Bush has spent more than four years fighting Iraqi insurgents, and since a large enough minority of Americans support Bushs war to persuade Congress to continue funding it, Americans would do well to consider the purpose of the insurgency. Understanding the purposes of the insurgency is a prerequisite for considering the best means for ending it, which the Bush administration professes to want to do.

It is also important to consider George Bushs professed reasons for fighting the war. Since Bushs initially professed reason for the war, weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam Hussein, were found not to exist, and since Hussein himself no longer exists, Bush had to come up with additional reasons for fighting his war: to spread democracy to the Iraqi people and to fight them over there so that we dont have to fight them over here.

All of these things are laudable goals: stopping the insurgency, giving Iraq the opportunity for democracy, and not having to fight the insurgents in our own country. So how can those things best be accomplished?

I recently posted an essay on DU titled The Purpose of the U.S. Invasion and Occupation of Iraq. That should serve as a useful starting point, so Ill start with a brief summary of that:


A brief synopsis of the purpose of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq

The purpose of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq that I described in my recent post was based mostly on a book by Antonia Juhasz, The Bush Agenda Invading the World One Economy at a Time. In a nutshell, the invasion provided a great opportunity for many of George Bushs wealthy supporters to make millions, billions, or tens of billions of dollars from contracts with the U.S. government to assist in the war effort and the reconstruction of Iraq and through access to Iraqi oil and other resources. A highly related purpose is for the occupation of Iraq to provide a launching site to occupy much of the Middle East, in order to satisfy the Bush administrations imperial ambitions and acquire access to literally trillions of dollars worth of oil and other resources. The evidence for all this is overwhelming and is summarized in my previous post, but Ill briefly recap some of it here:

Minutes of Dick Cheneys secret Energy Task Force meetings, launched just 10 days after he took office, and attended by representatives of many of the corporations who most benefited economically from the Iraq invasion, showed the Task Force recommending to make energy a priority of our trade and foreign policy and support initiatives by Mid-East suppliers to open up areas of their energy sector to foreign investment.

A document that the Bush administration paid $250 million to produce, which laid out details for the economic transformation of Iraq, was completed just a few weeks prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

L. Paul Bremer III, Bushs appointee as the administrator of Iraq, quickly put into effect 100 orders which facilitated the recommendations of Cheneys Energy Task Force and the above noted plans for the economic transformation of Iraq: All members of the Baath Party and of the Iraqi Army were fired from their jobs without pay, thus putting hundreds of thousands of Iraqis (many who were highly skilled) out of work and paving the way for U.S. corporations to receive billions of dollars in reconstruction contracts; the Trade Liberalization Policy provided many benefits to U.S. corporations, devastating Iraqs businesses and industries in the process; an order for Prohibited media activity essentially outlawed any news media criticisms of the Bush administrations role in Iraq; The Foreign Investment Order provided the legal framework for the invasion of U.S. corporations into Iraq; Americans were placed in numerous key positions; and many other repressive orders were decreed by Bremer, including the granting of criminal and civil immunity for all Americans from Iraqs pre-existing laws.

Billions of dollars worth of no-bid contracts were provided by the U.S. government for reconstruction and security purposes. But while almost all of this money was awarded to Bush and Cheney cronies, the Iraqis were almost totally excluded from the process. Furthermore, the reconstruction effort was a miserable failure, with electricity, potable water, and sewage services remaining far below pre-war levels. Audits of U.S. taxpayer funds found contract files to be unavailable, incomplete, and unreliable, while $8.8 billion from the Development fund for Iraq were completely unaccounted for. Yet none of this interfered with U.S. corporations receiving the full amounts of their contracts plus much more.

The so-called transition of power to the Iraqis was accomplished in form only, with U.S. puppets installed to ensure that Bushs agenda would proceed unhampered.

And as for U.S. oil companies, Production Sharing Agreements were put in place to ensure their access to Iraqs oil, that access was multiplied manifold, their profits have skyrocketed since the occupation began, and the Bush administration remains hard at work to ensure that their access to oil increases and becomes permanent.


Iraqi opinions of the U.S. occupation of their country

Apparently Americans are the only people in the world who continue to be unaware of the extent of Iraqi hostility against the occupation of their country. A World Opinion Poll of Iraqis taken in September of 2006 makes that quite point clear: 71% of Iraqis want us to leave within a year, 20% want us to leave within two years, and only 9% want U.S. troops to be reduced as the security situation improves; only 21% feel that the U.S. military is a stabilizing force in Iraq, compared to 78% who believe that the U.S. military is provoking more conflict than it is preventing; and 61% believe that if U.S. led forces were to leave in the next six months, day to day security for ordinary Iraqis would increase, compared to only 34 % who believe that it would decrease. But the most shocking part of the poll is that 61% of Iraqis not only disapprove of our presence in their country, but they actually approve of the violent attacks on U.S. led forces.

To put the results of these polls into words, the way that most Iraqis feel about the occupation of their country has been well captured by an unknown Iraqi girl:

I don't understand the 'shock' Americans claim to feel at the lurid pictures. You've seen the troops break down doors and terrify women and children curse, scream, push, pull and throw people to the ground with a boot over their head. You've seen troops shoot civilians in cold blood. You've seen them bomb cities and towns. You've seen them burn cars and humans using tanks and helicopters. Is this latest debacle so very shocking or appalling?

The Americans and British are saying that they are 'insurgents' but people from Najaf are claiming that innocent civilians are being killed on a daily basis.

I sometimes get emails asking me to propose solutions or make suggestions. Fine. Today's lesson: don't rape, don't torture, don't kill and get out while you can while it still looks like you have a choice... Chaos? Civil war? Bloodshed? Well take our chances just take your Puppets, your tanks, your smart weapons, your dumb politicians, your lies, your empty promises, your rapists, your sadistic torturers and go.


The purpose of the Iraqi insurgency

Thus Iraq has been invaded by an imperialist, fascist power. Imperialist in the sense of a power that engages in forceful extension of a nation's authority by territorial gain or by the establishment of economic and/or political dominance over other nations; and fascist in the sense of a militaristic government that is so intimately aligned with corporate interests that it essentially represents those interests alone, to the exclusion of the interests of the vast majority of the nations citizens.

The Iraqi insurgency then is a reaction against this invasion and occupation. In that sense its purpose is little different than the purpose of the American revolution, the fight for independence of many African nations against their imperial rulers in the mid Twentieth Century, or any of several other independence movements.

Americans were incensed when about three thousand of their fellow citizens were murdered in the attacks of September 11, 2001, and many of them considered those attacks as sufficient justification for perpetual war and the suspension of their Constitution. Why then should it be difficult them to understand why a nation attacked and occupied by an imperial power, resulting in almost a million deaths, four million refugees, and the devastation of their country, would want to fight back? Why would so many American citizens fall for the Bush administration line that Iraqis who fight back against the occupation of their country are thereby committing acts of terrorism?

This point was confirmed by General George Casey, who was the most senior
commander of Coalition forces in Iraq, when he told Congress in September 2005, The perception of occupation in Iraq is a major driving force behind the insurgency. And Antonia Juhasz neatly summarizes the role of Bush policies in fueling the insurgency:

Many (Iraqis) were willing to give the Americans the benefit of the doubt once they were on Iraqi soil. This goodwill was quickly eroded by U.S. troops and Bush administration polices

Across Iraq, the provision of basic services is insufficient and in most cases worse than before the war. The lack of services and the knowledge that U.S. corporations have received tens of billions of dollars for this failure helped fuel Iraqi opposition to the occupation and significantly contributed to overall instability in Iraq. The Bush agenda, the Bremer Orders, and U.S. corporations are fully to blame. The Bush administration did not enter Iraq with plans to rebuild but with plans to remake Iraq into a U.S. corporate free-for-all. And it succeeded


Bringing democracy to Iraq

Therefore, when George Bush says that a major purpose of his war is to bring democracy to Iraq, he is either incredibly stupid or hes lying. To George Bush, democracy is a government that promulgates rules that provide all the advantages to wealthy corporations, at the expense of everyone else. Juhasz describes the Bush approach to corporate globalization with respect to his continuing attempts to push through the Middle East Free Trade Area agreements:

The individual Middle East Free Trade Area agreements are paving the way for a radical, thoroughly U.S.-centric corporate globalization agenda for the Bush administration to carry from country to country in the Middle East and then well beyond. The president has forced into acquiescence the growing wave of critics against these economic policies, both within the United States and abroad by linking them to the defeat of terrorism. It is economic imperialism in its truest form. Governments the world over are forced to adopt economic policies that benefit the growth and power of one nation with a threat of military action if they do not accede, all in the name of world peace. The result for the people of the Middle East will likely be increased subservience to U.S. corporations rather than the freedom promised by Bush

But contrary to what George Bush would have us all believe, privatization and free trade are not at all synonymous with democracy. In fact, his idea of free trade doesnt even have anything to do with the competitive markets which ideally compose capitalism. Ideally, competitive markets can benefit society by driving the production of high cost products sold at reasonable prices. But when privatization is divorced from competition, as when George Bush awards billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to his cronies, then the lust for profits tends to price the necessities of life out of the range of the majority of people. Juhasz explains how this has worked in practice:

Privatizations of former government services, especially when forced on a country rather than chosen by its government, have proven time and again to be more costly, as private companies increase fees and reap the rewards as profits rather than as money to be reinvested in the public service

If George Bush has any interest in bringing democracy to Iraq, he should realize that a first step and prerequisite towards accomplishing that would be to end the illegal and despised occupation of that country.


Fighting them there so we dont have to fight them here

This excuse for the continued occupation of Iraq makes no more sense than George Bushs professed desire to bring democracy to Iraq. When has a nation fighting for freedom against an occupying power ever followed that countrys soldiers back to their homeland after the occupiers left their country?

That kind of mindless rhetoric is consistent with George Bushs claim that Muslims commit acts of terror against us because they hate our freedoms. But nothing could be further from the truth. That ridiculous unfounded assertion is directly contradicted by an analysis conducted by the Bush administrations own Defense Science Board, which concluded:

In the war of ideas or the struggle for hearts and minds, American efforts have not only failed, they may also have achieved the opposite of what they intended American direct intervention in the Muslim world has paradoxically elevated the stature of, and support for, radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single digits in some Arab societies In the eyes of Muslims, the American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only to more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve America national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self-determination.


Some concluding thoughts

Juhasz asks some questions that all Americans ought to be asking themselves right now:

Are we to be a country that is hated because of its illegal invasions and occupations, economic brutality, greed, hypocrisy, violence, and disregard for the lives of others in pursuit of its own security? Whose young are forced to fight in wars to defend these policies, ushering thousands to an early death? Are we already that country?

And as to the near future, she says:

Iran may be next For most of its history until the Iranian revolution in 1979, Irans oil has belonged to U.S. and British oil companies. The oil companies want the oil back. The administration would also like to see regime change reach Iran.

For four years, the peace movement has kept the Bush administration out of Iran by demonstrating that the United States simply has had no stomach for a second war in the gulf. With the administrations time running out, however, its stance against Iran is hardening and talk of war has increased.

I dont know for sure whether or its true that the peace movement alone has kept us out of war with Iraq. Nor do I know whether or not the peace movement or anything else will be sufficient to prevent George Bush or Dick Cheney from ordering a nuclear attack against Iran.

It seems to me that the one event most likely to prevent catastrophe and the possible onset of World War III is the impeachment of George Bush and Dick Cheney. Even it its true (which I doubt) that the votes for conviction in the Senate will not materialize during the nationally televised impeachment hearings, just the attempt to remove those two war criminals from office will be likely to distract and weaken them to the point that they will be prevented from wreaking more catastrophic damage on our country and on the world.

If you cant make it to the impeachment march next Saturday, September 15th, please consider voting in this on-line referendum to impeach Bush, which is now approaching the one million mark, with 939 thousand votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for posting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. Little nitpick.
"I don't understand the 'shock' Americans claim to feel at the lurid pictures. You've seen the troops break down doors and terrify women and children curse, scream, push, pull and throw people to the ground with a boot over their head. You've seen troops shoot civilians in cold blood. You've seen them bomb cities and towns. You've seen them burn cars and humans using tanks and helicopters."

No. In large part, they have not seen this, because it is not shown to them by their nightly news. Iraqis see this. Non-Americans see a lot more of it in their media. Americans see extremely little of it, and are trained to, moreover, not particularly care - concern for the fate of American troops themselves is a fundamental part of the national mythology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Theres a lot of truth in what you say
The Iraqi girl who wrote that post is probably unaware of the extent to which Americans are shielded by our corporate media against what is really going on in Iraq.

But on the other hand, Abu Ghraib got a fair amount of coverage. And any American who has kept up with the news as much as a lot of DUers have must have a pretty good idea.

And you're right that Americans are taught to not particularly care about the fate of non-Americans. That is a terrible shame, and if it doesn't change before too long, we're going to end up like Hitler's Germany. Or the Roman empire. Either way it would be very ugly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Actually re: to worship the troops and be concerned only about them...
I was thinking about say.. anchors, journalists, sports broadcasters... the ones presenting the media, they are completely into this cult. Let's skip Hitler - the Roman example is the more pertinent one. There's an absolute belief that it's the American soldiers who are the real heroes and the real victims of war, and the Iraqis?

...

Who cares.

That's what people act like, from the media presenters on down. And it's heresy when people act otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. Yes, that's what really irks me
Why don't we ever hear on the "mainstream" news arguments about the war that take into account the cost to the Iraqi people and what the Iraqi people think about the war. Instead, all we get is blaming the Iraqis for not supporting our (i.e. Bush's and Cheney's) agenda over there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. You're on the google
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 08:59 PM by seemslikeadream
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. Cool - Thanks for showing that to me.
And look at this -- You're on there too:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Number+ONE+on+goog...

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Thanks for showing it to me
:hi: :
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thank you for so eloquently speaking truth
So many people don't want to get what we're doing there.

"WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"

1984
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Thank you -- I never did read that book
But somehow I think that George Bush and his handlers must have used it as a blueprint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. They've had plenty of practice
Nixon Era, Iran-Contra, Now

It's all the SAME PEOPLE!!!

Since we refuse to put them in jail, it's our fault they keep showing up like bad pennies.

Also, I've never read 1984- trying to get a copy at my Library. I suppose it will be like reading "Perils At Sea" while on the Titanic. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondie58 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. you should read it sometime
like you have time, with a little one lol! I read it in my early twenties and am rereading it now 20+ years later. It is frightening how close it is to this Bush administration.

Thanks for the excellent rant. No wonder you make the #1 list on Google- or the google, as Bush likes to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. Don't you mean "insurgencies" plural?
Sure, all of them want us out, but their other goals are in serious conflict with each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. True
They certainly don't present a uniform front, but both the Sunnis and the Shi'ites are united in the goal of wanting their imperial occupiers to leave. Only the Kurds are not overwhelmingly opposed to our presence there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
8. one of the other reasons for the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq was . . .
George W. Bush's perverse need to be a "war president" -- and all that entails . . . including trampling civil rights and liberties here at home in the name of "national security" . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Yes, I believe that's true
It's not as well documented as the desire to take over Iraq's oil and their economy, but it is undoubtedly at least partially true. Of course, it's strongly related, because trampling on our civil rights here allows him to set up a dictatorship in the U.S., just like he's done in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. Marvelous job on this Time for Change.
Edited on Fri Sep-07-07 12:16 PM by mzmolly
:toast:

"To George Bush, democracy is a government that promulgates rules that provide all the advantages to wealthy corporations, at the expense of everyone else."

This IS the Republican thought process. "Let them eat cake" if we have any left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Thank you Ms. Molly
Sometimes I wonder if this nightmare called the Bush/Cheney administration is ever going end while I'm still alive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. I hear ya on the nightmare.
1/20/09, the official end of the nightmare, I hope. I don't think I could take another Republican administration, frankly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libodem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
15. This was so enlightening
and very well presented. Thank you, Time for change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
18. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 31st 2014, 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC