In Defense of Marxism-http://www.marxist.com

Workers Interantional League-http://www.socialistappeal.org







Between Iraq and a Hard Place

An Occupation Gone Awry, and a "Job-Loss" Recovery at Home. By John

Peterson.

http://www.socialistappeal.org/usa/between_iraq_and_a_hard_place.html

Between Iraq and a Hard Place - An Occupation Gone Awry, and a "Job-Loss"

Recovery at Home

By John Peterson

Just a few weeks ago (or even a few days ago, depending on who you ask),

Bush, Rumsfeld, and co. seemed incapable of doing any wrong (again,

depending on who you ask). The lighting charge across Iraq led to one of the

quickest and most decisive military victories in the history of warfare.

Saddam Hussein's Ba'athist regime collapsed like a house of cards, and the

stunned Iraqi population stood back and waited to see what would happen in

the aftermath. The US arrogantly threatened to extend the "war on terror"

further, and it seemed as though US control over the world's second largest

oil reserves was firm. Here at home, things were looking up as well. Despite

an economy that was shaky at best, a broad range of economic indicators

seemed to indicate that this time for sure, the robust recovery the markets

have been predicting for the past two years had arrived. How quickly things

change!

Iraq

The situation in Iraq has deteriorated to a nightmarish level for the

architects of the Project for a New American Century. More US troops have

been killed since the war "ended" than during the war itself. The number of

wounded (rarely reported in the media) has skyrocketed as well. No WMD's

have been found, Saddam continues to issue proclamations from hiding, there

is ethnic violence in the Kurdish north, the UN headquarters has been blown

up, and now the all-important Shiia areas are being destabilized with a

massive bomb attack and the death of a top cleric in Najaf. All across Iraq,

US patrols come under fire daily from increasingly organized and

sophisticated guerrillas. The obtuseness of the American ruling class stands

out in all its mediocrity when it defends its lack of post-war planning by

saying: how could we have foreseen the possibility of a guerrilla war when

there are no jungles there? That the war planners of the world's mightiest

power have now been reduced to screening the 1965 movie "The Battle of

Algiers" to gain some insight into the French defeat in Algeria speaks

volumes.

The war planners had estimated that by now in September, US troops levels

would have been reduced to just 30,000, freeing them up for other wars and

allowing for more or less normal rotations back home. On the contrary, over

130,000 US troops remain I Iraq, and still the top US general, Richard

Meyers, is forced to admit that "we are stretched thin". According to

Tikrit-based Sergeant Michael Evans, "it's getting crazy out there, and we

can't be everywhere at the same time". While many call for more troops to

be sent, Rumsfeld is adamant that more US troops are not needed. As a

champion of a smaller invasion force and overall military, it would be a

political shot in the foot for Rumsfeld to admit that he has miscalculated -

not to mention the reaction he would get at home. But more to the point, he

cannot support the sending of more troops because the fact is that they are

not available. With so many occupations going on around the world, the

number of available reserves has been all but used up. And let's not forget

that these folks signed up for some extra cash to be "weekend warriors", not

full time soldiers!

In a huge reversal of policy, Bush and his team have now been forced to

crawl back to the UN in search of "legitimacy", and more importantly, money

and troops. If other countries want to send their soldiers into the Iraqi

quagmire, the US will support them wholeheartedly! With Tony Blair balking

at the sending of more forces, the US is exerting enormous pressure on other

countries. But Bush and co. don't quite have the leverage they had just a

few months ago to make these countries an "offer they can't refuse". The

patience of the US's imperialist rivals has worn thin in the face of insult

after insult from the world's most arrogant ruling class (remember

"cowardly" French and "freedom fries, anyone?)

As for the American troops stationed in Iraq, the heat, threat of sudden

death or dismemberment, and a hostile population are difficult deal with.

But for most soldiers, this is all part of their job, and they endure it

grudgingly. What really riles them up, however, is the uncertainty that

surrounds their return home. They were told that the "shortest way home was

through Baghdad" - in other words, once they had done the job they were

trained for, they would be sent home. Instead, tens of thousands of troops,

who had expected to be home months ago, are sent out on patrols and policing

operations which they are not qualified to do. There are not even enough

weapons to go around, and many US troops are picking up and using captured

Iraqi AK-47s (and have found that they are more reliable and efficient than

American "high-tech" weapons). First they were told they would have to stay

for 6 months, now their "tour of duty" has been extended to 12 months, and

even 18 months in many cases!

Earlier this summer, there were many reports and stories from discontented

soldiers. The media was quiet about this for sometime (and were surely

ordered to keep these stories out of the public eye), but on the occasion of

Rumsfeld's recent visit to Iraq, it has been impossible to keep the true

feelings of the soldiers under wraps. Asked her opinion of Rumsfeld's visit,

Specialist Rue Gretton, had the following kind words for the Secretary of

Defense: "I don't give a damn about Rumsfeld. All I give a damn about is

going home."

Troops tidied up in preparation for a speech by Rumsfeld, which he ended up

canceling due to a "tight schedule", opting instead to meet with military

leaders. Said one soldier, "the only thing his visit meant for us was we had

to clean up a lot of mess to make the place look pretty. And he didn't even

look at it anyway."

Another soldier, Sergeant Green, who will likely miss her 16-year-old

daughter's entire school year, had this to say: "If I got to talk to

Rumsfeld I'd tell him to give us a return date. We've been here six months

and the rumor is we'll be here until at least March. This is totally,

totally uncalled for."

According to a Reuters report:

"When the Armed Forces Network showed earlier footage of Rumsfeld saying

that fresh U.S. troops were unnecessary in Iraq, soldiers at the base threw

their hands in the air and shouted 'No way' at the television.

"'I ain't happy. No way am I happy seeing that,' said Specialist Devon

Pierce, whose wife was due to give birth to his first son in two weeks.

'This tour is hard, real hard. It's too much. It should be six months.'

"Other soldiers said they could not complain openly about their long

deployment for fear of being disciplined. Earlier this year, military

leaders warned their troops they should not show disrespect for Rumsfeld

after a rash of criticism from soldiers in Iraq appeared in the media."

The discontent, frustration, and lack of respect for the US military and

civilian leadership is apparent. During the Vietnam War, it took years for

the morale of the troops and Americans here at home to be sapped to this

degree. Combine this with cuts in combat pay and cuts in veteran's benefits,

and Bush is rapidly cutting out from under his feet one of his most

important political constituencies - the military and their families. But

wait! At least things on the economic front are going well, right? Wrong.

The Economy

Recent glowingly optimistic forecasts from the mainstream economic pundits

made it appear that the US economy was on the brink of a genuine recovery. A

string of better-than-expected data on retail sales, durable goods, consumer

sentiment and housing led many to believe the labor market might be starting

to improve as well. Surely businesses would now begin hiring back the

millions of workers who have been laid off in the past 2.5 years. Think

again. While it is clear that the figures from any single week or month

cannot give the whole picture, the latest data on jobs makes it clear that

there is a trend developing. The "job-loss" recovery is now a harsh reality

for millions of Americans.

Despite having changed the way unemployment figures are reported (to cast

them in a more favorable light), official unemployment remains high at 6.1

percent. In a shock to investors, the government, and of course millions of

Americans currently seeking work, manufacturing jobs fell 44,000 - the 37th

straight month of decline - while service jobs tumbled 67,000 in August - a

far cry from the increase of 12,000 expected by forecasters. Far more jobs

have been shed than during the "job-less" recovery of 1991. How is this

possible? Simple: the bosses are getting more and more productivity out of

fewer and fewer workers. Why hire more workers when you can squeeze more

value out of those you already have? Why spend money on Social Security

taxes, pensions, healthcare, benefits, etc. when you can fire more workers

and cut costs?

Under normal circumstances, Wall Street reacts favorably to such reports -

less workers doing the same amount or more work means more profits for CEOs

and investors! But this time, even the most bullish investors recognize

that this reflects a deeper and more dangerous situation for the economy as

a whole. Consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of economic

activity depends on workers having jobs and job security - neither of which

exists at the present time. Consumer debt has reached astronomical levels,

and all that borrowed money has to be paid back sometime or other - even if

the interest rates are relatively low.

Although the US economy grew by a respectable (in capitalist terms) 3.1

percent in the second quarter of 2003, this was largely due to a massive

increase in defense spending by the government. In the largest rise since

1951 at the height of the Korean War, defense spending surged 45.9 percent.

This is great news for the profits of arms manufacturers, but not for

working people - these industries created hardly any jobs even with this

much of the taxpayers' money (not to mention that poor people and workers in

uniform from around the world will be the ones blown up by this very

expensive scrap metal!).

Massive tax cuts in an effort to prime the economy have appeared as only a

blip on the economic radar. Again, the example of Japan, which has stagnated

in recession for over a decade despite having spent over a trillion dollars

trying to jump-start the economy, haunts the serious American capitalists.

Elsewhere, Europe's economic motor Germany is already in recession, with

France and Britain in not much better shape. Cheap, increasingly high-tech

Chinese exports, combined with the Yuan's exchange rate pegged to the

dollar, threaten to ruin entire sectors of US industry and further deepen

the already record trade deficit.

As for the federal budget deficit, Bush's policies and the crisis of

capitalism have turned a sizable surplus into a $900 billion shortfall over

the next two years. Having already spent $80 billion on the Iraq war, Bush

is now looking for a further $65 billion. At the same time, he is cutting

education and Medicare, and has made it easier for hospitals to turn away

patients who seek treatment in the emergency room.

What about his campaign promise that: "big government is not the answer. The

alternative ... is to put conservative values and conservative ideas into

the thick of the fight for justice and opportunity."? What a crock! Aside

from doing nothing in the name of "justice and opportunity," Bush has

bloated the federal workforce by over a million people (thousands of whom

spend their time spying on American citizens). Sure, it was nice of him to

create these jobs, but through Homeland Security legislation, he has ensured

that hundreds of thousands of federal workers will be denied the right to

unionization and collective bargaining as a matter of "national security".

The list of crimes that Bush and the ruling class are perpetrating against

working people grows longer every day. But there is a limit to everything,

and sooner or later, this will be reached. With the untenable situation in

Iraq, and the ongoing economic instability at home, Bush and his

administration are in for a long winter going into the 2004 presidential

campaign. Bush II may well follow Bush the First's ignominious path to

first-term election defeat despite having a "victorious" war under his belt.

But who will replace him? That is a subject for another article, but

suffice it to say that the Democrats are incapable of truly improving our

conditions of life or resolving the world economic crisis of capitalism.

Working people need our own party, based on the trade unions, and armed with

a socialist program! This is the main issue confronting working people and

youth in the coming months and years. Join the WIL in the fight for a

better world!

Well written piece...^

-Under normal circumstances, Wall Street reacts favorably to such reports -

less workers doing the same amount or more work means more profits for CEOs

and investors! But this time, even the most bullish investors recognize

that this reflects a deeper and more dangerous situation for the economy as

a whole. Consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of economic

activity depends on workers having jobs and job security - neither of which

exists at the present time. Consumer debt has reached astronomical levels,

and all that borrowed money has to be paid back sometime or other - even if

the interest rates are relatively low.-



so the question is when will the above fleecing occur

In the 118 days between May 1 and August 26, there were 63 American battlefield deaths in Iraq. About two weeks ago, the left-wing press recognized that this did not sound as dramatic as they wished. So they started totaling all military deaths in Iraq, including those from accidents, which happen in military life every day, everywhere. This brought the total up by another 78. They're more comfortable with that total number, 141. But the true battlefield number is 63.

This is significant, because in the first stage of the war, from March 19 until April 30, 112 Americans died in combat, and 29 in various accidents. In those first 42 days, that meant almost 3 combat deaths per day. In the 118 days since then, there has been about one combat death every other day — 63 in 118 days. (The accidental deaths have been fairly consistent: 29 in 42 days early on, and after May 1, 78 in 118 days.)

The total number of American combat deaths in Iraq since March 19 has been, then, 175. But the number of U.S. Marines killed in one single night during the bombing of their barracks in Lebanon in 1983 — the first blow of terror against America — was 243. Drawing a lesson from that incident, Osama bin Laden said before September 11, 2001 that Americans have become soft and surrender prone. Plainly, this is true of some Americans; but I don't think of most.

Consider: During the Vietnam War, Americans lost an average of 15 dead every day; during the Korean War, 30 every day; and during World War II, an average of 214 every day. The numbers in Iraq this year have been far below that.

Tragic for the family as each of these deaths is, the total number of combat deaths in Iraq this year comes to 175 in 170 days, two-thirds of those during the first 40 days.

Nonetheless, it is hard for Americans watching television this summer to watch our young soldiers being picked off one at a time, assassinated really, not in battle, but in cowardly ways (a shot to the back of the skull on a university campus, a grenade dropped from a bridge into an open humvee, another grenade launched at Americans on guard at a children's hospital). Every single death hurts. The drumbeat regularity of one death every two days hurts even more.

The nine Democratic candidates for the presidency in 2004 are already campaigning bitterly on this and other "bad news" issues in Iraq. Democratic hardcore voters hate George Bush with insatiable passion. The candidates who desperately need this hardcore vote in the upcoming Democratic primaries fix on bad news in Iraq like vultures.

President Bush, largely silent just now, and biding his time, has powerful arguments waiting in rebuttal. He welcomes the strategic error of the Democrats in attacking him on the issue of war — where he is far stronger than they — rather than on domestic issues, where they have advantages.

For one thing, terrorist attacks all around the world dropped sharply in 2002 and even more so far during 2003.

Second, there has been no further terrorist attack in America in almost two full years. There have been multiple threats, and any day another tragedy may yet occur. But the nation is not where it was prior to September 11, 2001.

Afghanistan is no longer an open, free training ground for al Qaeda. Iraq is no longer threatening Iran and Kuwait. Also, no longer sending funds to Palestinian homicide bombers. Iran, Syria, and even Saudi Arabia are being more careful, now that they are closely watched. These are large steps forward for the Middle East. More must be done.

Since March thousands of terrorists from around the world have flocked to Iraq to wreak death on Americans. They are still pouring in, drawn like moths to flame. They hope to kill Americans. Instead, they themselves are being killed in droves. In early August, for instance, in an American sweep north of Baghdad, while eight Americans were being killed, more than 300 Fedayeen who engaged them died in combat.

Every terrorist who rushes to Baghdad to kill Americans is one less who is attacking Americans at home. The American strategy is to fight them in Iraq, and other places outside the U.S., rather than to sit and wait for them to come to harm us in New York, Washington, or Los Angeles.

More and more middle-level Iraqi are losing their fear of Saddam and the Baathist party, and are bringing intelligence to the Americans. Even restless, hostile youths on the street are refusing to take up arms against the Americans; the reward they are being offered for killing one American has had to be raised from $300 to $5,000.

Meanwhile, 95 percent of Iraq, while still bristling with privately held arms and dangerous, has brought very few deaths to Americans and others. Virtually all the killings of Americans these days take place within a triangle whose three sides are approximately 100 miles in length. This small triangle, a mere five percent of Iraq's land surface, runs from just south of Baghdad about 100 miles north to Tikrit, about 80 miles from Tikrit to Al-Ramadi, and another 80 miles from Al-Ramadi back to Baghdad.

This is the famous "Sunni triangle," Saddam's homeland, and his most-committed base, the main source of his leadership cadres, and his most trusted and fiercest loyalists. What future do these Baathist Sunnis face, in an Iraq democratically led by a Shiite and Kurdish majority? Even though their rights will be protected, and their interests represented in the new government, some of them will still have to face an unblinking justice. For how long will their scarlet crimes be remembered by those they tortured, murdered, and tormented for 30 long years? Some of them desperately fear a just society.

Still, this small strip of hostile territory will not forever hold its secrets. The call of peace and prosperity will beckon to many civilized and decent people, and age-old streams of dignified manners and peaceful commercial ways will again emerge and flow anew, even in the Sunni Triangle.

Meanwhile, the United States is composed of 50 states, and every day there is an average of one murder in each of them, 50 every day. These 50 are tragic losses, too. They put the losses in Iraq in perspective.

Except that the young American soldiers in Iraq are there as volunteers, who are offering their own lives so that others might live. That is what makes each of their deaths so uniquely painful to their fellow citizens.

We will never be able to honor them enough.



— Michael Novak

and now a word from our resident dissenter:

thank you for the rational Mr. Novac.

It stinks no matter how you slice it.

and people are angry.

these people, those people as well as your military.