My views and Me
All aboard the battle wagon for executing innocent human beings
By Ramen M Cardone
You can email me a response if you so choose at: ramen_cardone@hotmail.com
The essay by Kenneth M. Pollack entitled "Next Stop Baghdad?" that appeared in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs makes for grim reading. It would be less effective on my American mind if Pollack were a mere retired strategist who spins off his own war narratives in the comfort of his study. But unfortunately Pollack happens to be the deputy director for National Security Studies at the American Council on Foreign Relations and he has served on the American National Security Council before. I did my homework on this guy after reading his disturbing article indicating total disregard for human life. Furthermore, Foreign Affairs is no mere journal, it happens to be a very influential mouthpiece for the US administration and in many ways it mirrors the mindset of those who actually run the world's only remaining superpower. In his article, Kenneth Pollack makes his case for the invasion of Iraq and the toppling of Saddam Hussein's Government by whatever means (and whatever costs) necessary. He presents this as a natural progression after America's campaign against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and his recommendations are stark and brutally blunt: "The United States should invade Iraq, eliminate the present regime, and pave the way for a successor prepared to abide by its international commitments and live in peace with its neighbors." Pollack does not pretend that such a campaign has anything to do with the "global war on terror". He openly states that "Saddam Hussein must be dealt with" and that doing so would be in the service of American economic, political and military interests. This I agree with along with Bush's current campaign on terror. "But by any means possible." Is he implying we use nukes on Iraq, I for one think that’s jumping the gun. We (U.S.) haven’t inflicted nuclear fire power on a country since WWII. And because we're pissed we just start nuking sorverign countries? And slapping a “Terror” label on it. Some analysis’s would say this is a classic model of tyranny (Cruel and Unjust use of Power).
Pollack knows that he can get away with such antagonizing rhetoric with impunity as there stands no single country in the world today that can simply say no to us. Even the Governments of Europe have resigned themselves to the fact that whatever advice and words of caution they might offer at this stage would be like water off a duck's back. Furthermore, the countries of Asia, Latin America and Africa — much less the Arab world — are hardly in a position to resist either. Indeed, the most frightening thing about the language of people like Pollack is their willingness to talk about the deliberate slaughter of thousands of people as if it was the stuff of dry economics, or something out of a fictional novel. Revising his past and present positions, he does have a say so or an influence on our governmental administrations. Which in turn affects my niece, nephew and my life along with every American. I spent some time in the military and I learned and understood nuclear weapons in America serve the sole purpose of deterrence (just Knowing that they exist should be deterrence enough for any country). But to openly and blatantly threaten the use of them to destroy innocent lives is not what America once stood for or represented. I think Thomas Jefferson would side with me on this.
Speculating about the costs of such a military campaign, Pollack simply throws up some figures in the air: "All told, the (American) force should total roughly 200,000 to 300,000 people: for the invasion, between four and six divisions plus supporting units, and for the air campaign, 700 to 1,000 aircraft and anywhere from one to five carrier battle groups." Of course, Pollack conveniently forgets to include the total number of Iraqi civilian casualties that would invariably arise in the case of such a conflict. A figure of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, should America go all the way and decide to use nuclear weapons as its security services have warned that it would. Are we really ready for World War III? And yes that’s not a mere assumption on my behalf, you really think china, Yemen, or North Korea or the international community in general would just sit back and watch The U.S. bomb sovereign countries with little disregard for civilian casualties. And say in was all in the name of ellimating terrorists. Do you honestly think diplomacy will get us out of the watch-eye of the international community if such a mishap were to occur? Why do we always feel nuclear destruction will frighten every country of the world. I think we’ve come along way since the bombing of Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Flexing our military muscle isn’t always the best option, just look what it did for us during Vietnam. But Pollack's arrogant talk is matched only by his precise business sense. Later he states about the costs of rebuilding Iraq after it has been pounded to rubble by us (America) "The United States will also need to repair much of the damage done to the Iraqi economy since Saddam's accession." (Note that it is Saddam who is blamed for Iraq's economic decline, which it is, but we had an enormous effect with the numerous economic sanctions slapped on the country from 1991.) "We could undoubtedly raise substantial funds for this purpose from the GCC and perhaps some European and East Asian countries dependent on Persian Gulf oil." So here again we show the world we’re not interested in what’s best for the world, but what’s best for our economy. We were accused of having dollar signs in our eyes during the gulf war and we again send the same message. I believe we have other options. Mr. Pollack is stating the benefits for our country in exchange for the slaughter of millions through nuclear weapons. I for one can walk to work opposed to having dead human beings on my conscience as an American.
"Current estimates of the cost of rebuilding Iraq's economy, however, range from $50 billion to $150 billion, and that does not include repairing the damage from yet another major war on American society. The United States should thus be prepared to contribute several billion dollars per year for as long as a decade to rebuild the country." Again, there is a serious omission here: For as any economist will tell you, any country that invests in the rebuilding of the shattered economy of another state will not do so out of charity or goodwill, but for the simple reason that such re-developmental aid is bound to yield massive benefits in terms of development projects, contracts and useful economic partnerships and political alliances. In short we get cheap gas for murdering millions of innocent civilians and policing the world.
Pollack's essay is nothing less than a blueprint for the deliberate and systematic destruction of the economy and political system of another country, just so that it can be rebuilt anew according to the model pre-set by its invaders. Today the spin doctors have come up with all kinds of fancy terms and labels for such actions: "developmental aid", "political conditionally", "constructive engagement", etc. But in the past there was a much simpler, and more honest, term that was employed: imperialism. Venturing through the ideas of Pollack, this is the route Ramen Cardone foresees our beautiful country heading. The sooner we (America) come to terms with these painful realities, the sooner we will be able to address it.
Send E-Mail to: ramen_cardone@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2002 . All Rights Reserved