Twisted Logic of a Twisted Empire
U.S.bully on the brink of war
Revolutionary Worker #1185, February 2, 2003, posted at rwor.org
"They're calling it `A-Day'--A as in airstrikes so devastating they would
leave Saddam's soldiers unable or unwilling to fight. If the Pentagon sticks to
its current war plan, one day...the Air Force and Navy will launch between 300
and 400 cruise missiles at targets in Iraq. As CBS News correspondent David
Martin reports, this is more than the number that were launched during the
entire 40 days of the first Gulf War. On the second day, the plan calls for
launching another 300 to 400 cruise missiles. `There will not be a safe place in
Baghdad,' said one Pentagon official who has been briefed on the plan."
CBS News , January 24
"As the Pentagon continues a highly visible buildup of troops and weapons in
the Persian Gulf, it is also quietly preparing for the possible use of nuclear
weapons in a war against Iraq... Military planners have been actively studying
lists of potential targets and considering options, including the possible use
of so-called bunker-buster nuclear weapons against deeply buried military
Los Angeles Times , January 25
This month, nine weeks into the UN inspections of Iraq, the team led by Hans
Blix documented 16 empty, forgotten warheads from short-range rockets. The White
House spokesman tried to claim this military scrap was a "smoking gun"--a cause
for war--but the rest of the world did not agree.
As January 27 approached, the UN inspection teams prepared their formal
reports to the United Nations. And ruling class "wisemen" complained that this
administration isn't doing a good enough job "selling" its explanations for war.
So voila, here comes the White House inviting the world to "jump down the
rabbit hole" into Alice's Wonderland.
In a major PR offensive, spokespeople for the Bush administration argue that
if inspectors find nothing in Iraq then that too is a cause for war!
Here is how the argument goes: The U.S. insists Iraq has weapons of
mass destruction-- lots of them. They say that it is not the job of inspectors
to find such weapons, but it is Iraq's job to produce them.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said on TV: "The idea was not that inspectors
would look for a needle in a haystack, but that Saddam Hussein would show them
where the needle was in the haystack."
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice wrote ( New York Times,
Jan. 23): "Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily disarm?
Unfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no. Countries that decide to
disarm lead inspectors to weapons and production sites, answer questions before
they are asked, state publicly and often the intention to disarm and urge their
citizens to cooperate."
So, this government argument goes, if inspectors have found no banned
weapons, no secret stockpiles or labs--this only shows Iraq is being dishonest
and hiding them.
Let's review the twisted logic here: U.S. officials argue that
if UN inspectors find anything (no matter how small), that is proof that
the U.S. should go ahead soon and conquer Iraq. And if inspectors don't
find anything, it is also proof that the U.S. should go ahead and
conquer Iraq. It would not be surprising to hear Rumsfeld quip at his next press
conference: "Heads the U.S. invades, tails you get invaded."
Such is the sick logic of empire...a mix of Kafka's surreal trials, George
Orwell's doublethink, and Catch-22. This has no connection with reality--other
than the reality of empire-building.
Key to this whole argument is the claim that the U.S. government knows
there are massive hidden stockpiles in Iraq. When asked to provide evidence,
Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said on Decem- ber 5, "The President of the
United States and the Secretary of Defense would not assert as plainly and
bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not
true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it."
In other words: "The president must know something, trust him."
This is a particularly risky argument when it comes to this particular
president. But millions of people are profoundly disturbed that the government
is pressing ahead to war on such a flimsy and unbelievable basis. And in the
face of widespread mistrust and opposition--when hundreds of thousands are
taking the streets--the government is more and more resorting to the argument
that "war is inevitable, so get with it."
The Logic of "Inevitability"
They insist they are going to war and no one can stop them. Their president
has been coached to strut and swagger, wag his finger in the face of doubters
and nay-sayers--all to make it clear that his war machine is headed for
war and will drag the world along.
The U.S. government will have 150,000 troops and four aircraft carrier battle
groups in place by mid-February. And these troops are scheduled for war before
the scorching desert summer.
The U.S. government says they will do this--whether or not their allies
agree, whether or not the UN approves, whether or not the inspectors "find"
That "sense of inevitability" is supposed to bulldoze obstacles from their
There is, in fact, nothing inevitable about these warmakers getting away with
their ugly plans. And there is every reason for all of us to make sure that
these schemes don't come true.