The democratic countries must courageously show a willingness to apply the principles on which their internal system is based to the global sphere
The democratic countries must courageously show a willingness to apply the principles on which their internal system is based to the global sphere
NavigationOur writersOur Authors around the Web
|
![]() |
DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?Posts: Joined: 2004-10-07
Mahatma Gandhi, once said: "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?"
In the post-9/11 world, it is quite obvious that we face great uncertainty and confusion about the future direction of the US, Iraq, Afghanistan, terrorism, war, and peace. Through an increasingly concentrated, corporate owned and managed channel of mass communication, we are continuously bombarded with sophisticated propaganda techniques aimed at furthering the political-economic agendas of an elite, of rulers of the global village. Hence, we are often unable to distinguish between right and wrong, truth and fact, or reality and fiction.
During his campaign for reelection, President George W. Bush repeatedly invoked the grim memories of 9/11 and has said that freedom is on the march in Iraq and that the US and the world are now safer than before 9/11.
Meanwhile, the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, has said repeatedly that the American-led invasion of Iraq was illegal, that we have created a more dangerous world, and that we are less safe than before 9/11.
Quite naturally, people throughout the world prefer freedom to oppression, prosperity to poverty, sanitation to filth, health to sickness, employment to unemployment, and justice to injustice. Contrary to the ongoing political rhetoric which has been used to sugarcoat the miserable and chaotic conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan, democracy is not a product that can be imported or exported like a bar of soap or an automobile. It has to be cultivated and grown from within through careful planning, continuous nurturing, and education. In other words, a free and democratic system requires a particular environment, mind-set, culture, and socio-economic-political system that does not exist in Afghanistan, Iraqand unfortunatelyin most of the developing nations. Democracy, according to Abraham Lincoln, is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Can we claim that our nations domestic and international conduct have been based on the ideals of the Constitution on which this great nation was founded? Can we claim that we have captured the essence of freedom and democracy at home? George Bernard Shaw, once said, Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. Ah, democracyits easier said than done.
It is quite evident that the war on Iraq has not been about human rights, freedom, and democracy, but about access to oil resources, exertion of regional and global control, establishment of military bases, enhancement of the economic interests of the transnational corporations, and expansion of the imperial power of America.
Peace, Yahya R. Kamalipour
Submitted on Mon, 2004-12-13 16:44
Re: DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?
"...It is quite evident that the war on Iraq has not been about human rights, freedom, and democracy, but about access to oil resources, exertion of regional and global control, establishment of military bases, enhancement of the economic interests of the transnational corporations, and expansion of the imperial power of America."
That's right! Just look how America took over the oilfields of Kuwait, installed a puppet government, and built hundreds of airbases for B-52 bombers! Greedy imperialist, slobbering hordes of infidel Americans that...
Oh, wait...
You mean that didn't happen when America liberated Kuwait?
Never mind.
Peace...through superior firepower.
IM
Submitted on Tue, 2004-12-14 01:42
reply Re: DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?
Iron Mike,
["That's right! Just look how America took over the oilfields of Kuwait, installed a puppet government, and built hundreds of airbases for B-52 bombers! Greedy imperialist, slobbering hordes of infidel Americans that..."]
The US created bases in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States. Kuwait is a small country and was within reach of Saddam's missiles, so when the US didn't go on to Baghdad in 1991, it was prefereable to chose the alternatives available.In fact the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, which some think was engineered by the US when Saddam asked 'permission' from April Gillespie and thought he had got it,made the offer to the US of bases likely.
As far as stealing Kuwaiti oil, there wasn't a good enough pretext, after all it was a small country that threatnened no one and had been despoiled to boot. Now Iraq with the brutal Saddam, that's another story.There are more ways to skin the oil cat than the obvious one.
Message was edited by: brolly2_1
Submitted on Wed, 2004-12-15 02:27
reply Re: DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?
Brolly,
Well, at least you're consistent! But this time, you're consistently wrong. Unlike you, I've actually been to these bases and they are not US bases. These are host nation bases which provide us ramp space and support facilities. But the host nations don't do this out of just the goodness of their hearts. It cost the US big bucks to maintain those facilities. Or do you suggest the Saudi royal family is a puppet of the US? They would not look kindly on such a suggestion.
Not enough pretext to steal Kuwaiti oil? of course there was...it's called "quid pro quo"...we liberate your country and you OWE us your oil. Instead, they regained their sovereignty and sell to us and everyone else at market rates.
The point is, if we wanted to "kick their ass and take their oil," we could have done so. We would not need to invent pretexts in Kuwait or Iraq. But the US is not the bully nation the "America haters" would like to portray.
It is in our national interest to ensure a politically stable region and peacefully buy what we need...and it's cheaper in the long run.
IM
Submitted on Wed, 2004-12-15 15:55
reply Re: DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?
Iron Mike,
[These are host nation bases which provide us ramp space and support facilities. But the host nations don't do this out of just the goodness of their hearts. It cost the US big bucks to maintain those facilities.]
Seems a coincidence that the host nation had the bases in the first place. Or did the US suggest that the hosts supply the base and the US will supply the military personnel and hardware? As for the big bucks that you pay them see below.
[Instead, they regained their sovereignty and sell to us and everyone else at market rates.]
And sell to you in US Dollars, which you can print all day long and so the world becomes flooded with Petro -Dollars, which means they have to buy US goods or lose on the exchange rate big tim when they convert them into another currency. Ask the Chinese or the Japanese what they are going to do with all their Dollar reserves. If they try selling them on any scale to spread their risk and broaden their holdings, they will lower the Dollar so fast that they would lose out in the process and have to discontinue. So they are in the position of having to sit on them. All this suits the US , which has done a fine piece of financial engineering. It certainly pays to be a military superpower, dont you think.
Submitted on Thu, 2004-12-16 00:01
reply Re: DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?
Let me refresh your memory. The bases in Saudi Arabia were built in the era of the Iran-Iraq war when oil tankers were getting shwacked by both sides. The Saudis wisely invested in the best American technology---E3 AWACS and F-15 fighters. Large infrastructure had to be built to support them, train their pilots and AWACS crews. This required military and civilian contractor support. Naturally they supplied us ramp and hangar space for our own "support missions."
During the Iran-Iraq war these bases provide key locations for the Saudis to launch surveillance missions over the gulf and fighters to intercept and deter attack against Saudi interests. It also provided an excellent staging area for us---which became critical when the Saudi borders were threatened by an advancing Iraqi invasion force from Kuwait.
All around this was and continues to be a win-win relationship...at least as far as the bases. The point is we didn't "take" anything...it was bought and paid for or leased from the host nation.
Come to think of it, we have ramp and hangar space in YOUR country, on YOUR bases as well!
"All this suits the US , which has done a fine piece of financial engineering. It certainly pays to be a military superpower, dont you think."
Yes, it does. Thank you very much.
;)
IM
Submitted on Thu, 2004-12-16 03:38
reply Re: DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ?
Iron Mike,
["Come to think of it, we have ramp and hangar space in YOUR country, on YOUR bases as well!"]
We have what has been reasonably termed an 'elective' dictatorship in the words of the highly respected, late Lord Hailsham, a former Tory minister and Lord Chancellor.He said that a Prime Minister who has a very large parliamentary majority, under the British Constitution (unwritten) is in a position to dicate to the country and in the time he ocupies office, normally four to five years, he can do what he likes. Note that our electoral system allows the New Labour Party of whihc Blair is the leader, to have this large majority in parliament yet they only received about 40% of the vote.
By now you must be wondering what I am talking about in relation to the extract from your response that I have copied about your military bases in the UK. Well, the explanation is that a large majority of British people are uncomfortable with the continued presence of these US bases and the plans afoot for further co-operation by using our Fylingdales Early Warning establishment for the US Star Wars programme.
The opposition to the continued use of the bases has increased dramatically since Bush took office.There is a hearty distaste for the Bush Doctrine in the UK and only Blair and a few placemen around him, approve of it or go along for the ride. The average Englishman, who is informed about the neoconservatives, is extremely suspicious of these people and their philosophy and we regard the presence of US bases here as no longer being necessary for our security. If anything, the reverse is the case. I think you will find that only Owly, the Bush devotee is in favour, but then he is not your average Englishman but a Fifth Columnist for the US neocons.
During the Second World War, the British Tommy got fed up with American servicemen over here, because they received better pay, had a smarter uniform and had access to plenty of luxuries, such as candy (chocolate in the UK), silk stockings etc., and could compete more successfully for our young women. In no time at all, the following appeared on outside walls where ever US servicemen were based - 'GO HOME YANKS'. This might give you a flavour of the present attitude to US bases here.
Message was edited by: brolly2_1
Submitted on Thu, 2004-12-16 19:17
reply Post new comment |
![]() |
|