RW ONLINE: Twisted Logic of a Twisted Empire\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTwisted Logic of a Twisted Empire\r\nU.S.bully on the brink of war\r\n<\/p>
Revolutionary Worker #1185, February 2, 2003<\/i>, posted at rwor.org<\/p>\r\n<\/i>
\"They're calling it `A-Day'--A as in airstrikes so devastating they would \r\nleave Saddam's soldiers unable or unwilling to fight. If the Pentagon sticks to \r\nits current war plan, one day...the Air Force and Navy will launch between 300 \r\nand 400 cruise missiles at targets in Iraq. As CBS News correspondent David \r\nMartin reports, this is more than the number that were launched during the \r\nentire 40 days of the first Gulf War. On the second day, the plan calls for \r\nlaunching another 300 to 400 cruise missiles. `There will not be a safe place in \r\nBaghdad,' said one Pentagon official who has been briefed on the plan.\"<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
CBS News <\/i>, January 24<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p><\/i>\r\n<\/i>
\"As the Pentagon continues a highly visible buildup of troops and weapons in \r\nthe Persian Gulf, it is also quietly preparing for the possible use of nuclear \r\nweapons in a war against Iraq... Military planners have been actively studying \r\nlists of potential targets and considering options, including the possible use \r\nof so-called bunker-buster nuclear weapons against deeply buried military \r\ntargets....\"<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
Los Angeles Times <\/i>, January 25<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
This month, nine weeks into the UN inspections of Iraq, the team led by Hans \r\nBlix documented 16 empty, forgotten warheads from short-range rockets. The White \r\nHouse spokesman tried to claim this military scrap was a \"smoking gun\"--a cause \r\nfor war--but the rest of the world did not agree.<\/p>\r\n
As January 27 approached, the UN inspection teams prepared their formal \r\nreports to the United Nations. And ruling class \"wisemen\" complained that this \r\nadministration isn't doing a good enough job \"selling\" its explanations for war. \r\nSo voila, <\/i>here comes the White House inviting the world to \"jump down the \r\nrabbit hole\" into Alice's Wonderland.<\/p>\r\n
In a major PR offensive, spokespeople for the Bush administration argue that \r\nif inspectors find nothing <\/i>in Iraq then that too is a cause for war!<\/p>\r\n
Here is how the argument goes:<\/b> The U.S. insists Iraq has weapons of \r\nmass destruction-- lots of them. They say that it is not the job of inspectors \r\nto find such weapons, but it is Iraq's job to produce them.<\/p>\r\n
Secretary of State Colin Powell said on TV: \"The idea was not that inspectors \r\nwould look for a needle in a haystack, but that Saddam Hussein would show them \r\nwhere the needle was in the haystack.\"<\/p>\r\n
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice wrote ( New York Times, \r\n<\/i>Jan. 23): \"Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily disarm? \r\nUnfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no. Countries that decide to \r\ndisarm lead inspectors to weapons and production sites, answer questions before \r\nthey are asked, state publicly and often the intention to disarm and urge their \r\ncitizens to cooperate.\"<\/p>\r\n
So, this government argument goes, if inspectors have found no banned \r\nweapons, no secret stockpiles or labs--this only shows Iraq is being dishonest \r\nand hiding them.<\/p>\r\n
Let's review the twisted logic here: <\/b><\/b>U.S. officials argue that \r\nif UN inspectors find <\/i>anything (no matter how small), that is proof that \r\nthe U.S. should go ahead soon and conquer Iraq. And if inspectors don't \r\n<\/i>find <\/i>anything, it is also proof that the U.S. should go ahead and \r\nconquer Iraq. It would not be surprising to hear Rumsfeld quip at his next press \r\nconference: \"Heads the U.S. invades, tails you get invaded.\"<\/p>\r\n
Such is the sick logic of empire...a mix of Kafka's surreal trials, George \r\nOrwell's doublethink, and Catch-22. This has no connection with reality--other \r\nthan the reality of empire-building.<\/p>\r\n
Key to this whole argument is the claim that the U.S. government knows \r\n<\/i>there are massive hidden stockpiles in Iraq. When asked to provide evidence, \r\nBush spokesman Ari Fleischer said on Decem- ber 5, \"The President of the \r\nUnited States and the Secretary of Defense would not assert as plainly and \r\nbluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not \r\ntrue, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it.\"<\/i><\/p>\r\n<\/i>
In other words: \"The president must know something, trust him.\" \r\n<\/i>This is a particularly risky argument when it comes to this particular \r\npresident. But millions of people are profoundly disturbed that the government \r\nis pressing ahead to war on such a flimsy and unbelievable basis. And in the \r\nface of widespread mistrust and opposition--when hundreds of thousands are \r\ntaking the streets--the government is more and more resorting to the argument \r\nthat \"war is inevitable, so get with it.\"<\/p>\r\n<\/b>
The Logic of \"Inevitability\"<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
They insist they are going to war and no one can stop them. Their president \r\nhas been coached to strut and swagger, wag his finger in the face of doubters \r\nand nay-sayers--all to make it clear that his <\/i>war machine is headed for \r\nwar and will drag the world along.<\/p>\r\n
The U.S. government will have 150,000 troops and four aircraft carrier battle \r\ngroups in place by mid-February. And these troops are scheduled for war before \r\nthe scorching desert summer.<\/p>\r\n
The U.S. government says they will do this--whether or not their allies \r\nagree, whether or not the UN approves, whether or not the inspectors \"find\" \r\nanything.<\/p>\r\n
That \"sense of inevitability\" is supposed to bulldoze obstacles from their \r\npath.<\/p>\r\n
Here is more of their twisted logic: <\/b><\/b>If war is inevitable, \r\ntheir allies \"may as well\" get on board--to share in the post-war \r\ndecision-making. If war is inevitable, the UN \"may as well\" approve it, to \r\nretain some influence and to avoid later \"irrelevancy.\" If war is inevitable, \r\nthen the Iraqi military \"may as well\" overthrow Saddam without a war (and \"save\" \r\nIraqi lives). If war is coming, then the masses of people \"may as well\" support \r\nthe war, and just hope it is quick and decisive--so that the \"inevitable\" new \r\nU.S.-picked regime gets installed with a minimum of bloodshed and \r\ndestruction.<\/p>\r\n
\"When conquest is inevitable, just roll over and accept it.\" <\/i>Rapist \r\nlogic, gangster logic--announced on a world stage.<\/p>\r\n
There is, in fact, nothing inevitable about these warmakers getting away with \r\ntheir ugly plans. And there is every reason for all of us to make sure that \r\nthese schemes don't come true.<\/p>\r\n<\/b>
Who Is Threatening Who?<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
<\/p>\r\n
One of the reasons that the warmakers have such self-contradictory arguments \r\nis because they dare not, must not, publicly state their real reasons. And this \r\nmakes it all the more important to dig into the truth--the real motives and \r\ngoals--of this war.<\/p>\r\n
The U.S. is not making anyone safe-- the U.S. government is making a \r\nmassive global power grab that affects everyone and their future.<\/i><\/p>\r\n<\/i>
This is an imperialist war-in-the-making--and that is becoming clearer as \r\nthe discussion in the mainstream media now (more and more openly) uses colonial \r\nlanguage about \"ruling the world,\" a \"new Rome,\" empire, and even the word \r\n\"imperialism\" itself.<\/p>\r\n
Massive U.S. armies have gathered in the Persian Gulf--to do open heart \r\nsurgery on the economic and political lifelines of the world. And they threaten \r\nto flatten Iraqi cities, kill countless thousands of people, gut that country's \r\ninfrastructure, and create a flood of refugees.<\/p>\r\n
None of this is about safety for the people. It will not \"liberate\" Iraq. It \r\nwill not reduce the chance of new war. It will not mean the people of the \r\nPersian Gulf (or New York City, London, or Peoria, or Delhi) can sleep \r\neasier.<\/p>\r\n
When the bombs fall, the purpose of the U.S. armed forces will be to impose \r\nconditions through force of arms--and reshape international relations in the \r\ninterests of the power structure who sent them there to fight <\/i>. This is \r\nabout controlling the labor and wealth of large stretches of the world--pinning \r\ndown strategic resources to pin down potential adversaries. It is about \r\npreventing <\/i>the Iraqi and Arab people from controlling their destinies and \r\nresources--not \"liberating\" the people.<\/p>\r\n
All this will be no better if the U.S. imperialists \"win without \r\n<\/i>war.\"<\/p>\r\n
If they impose their will easily (through an Iraqi coup, or through \r\nsanctions), such \"cheap victory\" would only inflame their ambitions for some new \r\nmilitary gamble. This war will be no better whether the U.S. goes in with allies \r\nor without allies, unilaterally or multilaterally, blessed by the UN or not.<\/p>\r\n
The U.S. attack on Iraq means a superpower is seeking to strengthen itself \r\nthrough conquest of a country halfway around the world. And there is nothing \r\nthat can make it just.<\/p>\r\n
The Middle East is on the eve of a new war, and these warmakers must face \r\npowerful resistance. The more widely their twisted logic is revealed, the more \r\nclearly they are exposed and opposed--the better conditions we all <\/i>will \r\nhave for driving them back, loosening their hold on humanity, and forging a \r\nfuture world worth living in.<\/p>\r\n
\r\n\r\n
This article is posted in English and Spanish on Revolutionary Worker \r\nOnline
rwor.org
Write: Box 3486, \r\nMerchandise Mart, Chicago, IL 60654
Phone: 773-227-4066 Fax: \r\n773-227-4497
<\/p>\r\n\n","contact":"","link":"www.rwor.org","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/html","summary":"The RW on the "reasons" Bush and other's say they're going to war in Iraq","numcomment":1,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/2003\/02\/rw_online_twisted_logic_of_a_twisted_empire.htm","filesize":"10.1 kibibytes","article_url":"\/news\/2003\/02\/27842.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":72116,"heading":"hmmm? seems to be for WMD","article":"this seems a little weird now in retrospect?\r\nFind as many lies as you can and win a prize.","author":"archive 2-1-03 reasons for war","parent_id":27842,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2003-07-13 08:21:00","modified":"2003-07-13 08:21:00","fileurl":""}]}