Dr. Forbush Thinks

What the hell are we doing? By “we” I mean America. I am an American and what my government does is perceived by the world to be what I believe and agree with. After all, we are a free democracy and we choose our leaders. We make our choice based on self-interest for the most part, and in 2004 Americans believed that George W Bush and the Republicans would protect us. The country wanted a strong father figure that reassured us with telling us that he had everything under control. Enough Americans bought this and Republicans have continued to use their power to enact their vision of the world.

Conservatives and progressives both use the word freedom, but they use it in different ways. Freedom for conservatives is based on the idea that they should be free to make as much money as they can. Anything that gets in their way is considered an abridgement of their freedom. If a company believes that ripping large holes in the ground to get the resources out will create wealth, then they should be able to do it. If they want to bury their waste in the holes when they are done, then they should be able to do it. This is conservative American freedom. Progressive freedom is a bit different. Progressives believe that they should be free from harm. Progressives believe that people should be assured that there is a social agreement in which society will not be harmed by the action of an individual or even a company.

So, when we look at the War on Terror, and George W Bush tells us that the terrorists hate freedom, what does he mean? Since George the Lesser Bush is in fact a conservative, he may actually be right to some extent. Maybe the terrorists don’t want American corporations to rape the Middle East and take what they want (oil) out of the land and leave a mess behind. But, then again maybe the terrorists do want freedom to worship as they please, in their conservative Islamic sort of way. I would propose that George W Bush isn’t honest with this choice of words. I am guessing that the terrorists in Iraq would like freedom from the American occupation.

George W Bush doesn’t really want freedom as well. He doesn’t even agree with the conservative idea of freedom to make as much money as possible. He doesn’t believe that people should have freedom to cure themselves or protect themselves from diseases either. All of these freedoms were denied by our president when he vetoed the Stem Cell research bill. So, we should agree that George W Bush doesn’t really mean what he says when he proclaims that the “War on Terror” is about freedom.

So, what is this War about? Terrorism is a technique used to draw attention to a cause. Terrorism is not restricted to a group or ideology. There have been terrorists through out the history of civilization, and they have been successful in the past. We could argue that the American Revolutionary soldiers broke down the rules of warfare by sneak attacks on the British and this in a way was a type of terrorism. But, then again the British massacre in Boston could have been ruled a terrorist act as well. So, is terrorism a valid technique when the people using it are on our side? If so, then the War on Terror is a misnomer because we select which terrorist is good and which terrorist is bad. When Americans torture their prisoners is this not a terrorist act? When soldiers beat civilians with clubs and create faux executions they are acting just as the terrorists we are fighting.

So, what the hell are we doing?

We launched a war in Iraq on terror with the objective to disarm Saddam Hussein. We did that and the terrorist Saddam has been removed from power. So, what are we doing in Iraq now after our successful operation? Are we still fighting this war, or are we occupying a country? This is an important question that the Bush administration doesn’t really want to answer honestly. Liberation means that one takes away the tyrant and the people are free to rule themselves. The administration contends that this is what they have done. But reality seems to show a different picture. The Iraqis have increasing risen up to oppose the Americans. When the people in the country are opposed to the foreign power living in their land we historically have called this an occupation. But the Bush administration refuses to admit that they have occupied Iraq, because occupation of another country is not an American value. The conservatives claim to care about American values, as long as they don’t name the ones that they don’t like. I believe that it is quite important to call this action in Iraq what it actually is, the “Occupation of Iraq,” not the “War in Iraq.” This is just another way in which the conservatives have framed the language in their favor, and those opposed to the occupation need to realize that and act.

But, what is the reality of the War on Terror? Why are we still in Iraq, and what does the conservative agenda hope to accomplish? It is beginning to look like Iraq is a conservative experiment in ideology. The Bush administration has torn down everything in Iraq and according to conservative ideology the people will rise up and form a democracy, because that is the nature of human beings. Not only will they rise up to build a democracy, but also it will be a capitalist democracy where the wealthy will rise up to rule in a free market system. The wealthy will make money by exploiting the situation. Once they have their wealth they will want a government to protect their wealth and they will want their wealth to buy influence and create stability. And, of course since the Bush administration already knows what is best for Iraq they just need to nudge the Iraqis in the “right” direction.

But, how do the Iraqis view the occupation forces in their country? First of all, they view them as being ineffective and uninformed. The Iraqis want stability, but the Americans have acted in every way to disturb that stability. From the looting in the towns just after the invasion to the inability to quell the insurgents the Americans are viewed as weak and ineffective at best and naïve at worst. The Iraqis can only think of survival at any cost which leads them to support the more powerful and effective gangs, and religious extremists. The battle is for the hearts of the Iraqis, and we are loosing it every day.

So, what is the solution? Are we even moving in the right direction? As the Iraqis become less and less enamored with the American occupation we will continue to loose the hearts of the Iraqis. Is the solution to ignore this fact? Or, should we ask the important question, how do we win back the hearts of the Iraqis? The truth is that we can only win back the hearts of the Iraqis by building relationships with the Iraqi people. But, this solution is a nurturing progressive solution and it is certain that it will never happen under a conservative leadership. The paternal conservative “strict morality” solution is to force the Iraqis to like us. This solution requires us to round up the bad apples and torture them as we have been doing. This solution, however, will actually create more hatred for the American occupation and will result in more terrorists, not just in Iraq, but through out the Middle East. Is this what we really want? If we continue to stay the course this is exactly what we will get. And we will be forced to continue to ask the question: What the hell are we doing?










-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics, Iraq, War on Terror, Iraq War