“The question mark was emphasized…” -Dr. Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
So the other night I got a bit drunk. Yeah, no surprises. I was kicking around with ol’ Big Time Tommy Dakota, and we were discussing such topics as our lack of free time, our lack of direction with the Dudd Round, and the lack of scheme of world politics in general. You see, our classroom studies have more or less degenerated into a day-in, day-out round table discussion based on whatever pops up on the CNN or FOXNews ticker in our classroom projection tv while we are having our morning coffee. Sort of like Face the Nation except for us walking “the party line” is damn near outlawed… which leads me to believe that Washington is more far gone than I care to admit, but I digress…
The matter came about relative to our roles as CMOs, or Civil Military Officers, which is to say that we have become an Army of “Nation-Builders” rather than an Army of Soldiers, Killers, and War-fighters. I will submit to you, Mr. and Mrs. John Q. America, the real test of this war will not be whether or not Iraqis have a successful government and a peaceful country that sells us oil by freighter, but rather how the American military is capable of holding it’s own in the next conflict, or God-forbid, full-blown war. That will become the mark of success, if we can do both roles. However, I’ve been around Soldiers for a day or two now, and they have a hard enough time remembering where they left their equipment, which leads to a reason why in most cases we literally tie the important (and expensive) things to their uniforms with pieces of nylon rope. If that logic rolls over into their warfighting, we may be in trouble. We’ll see, perhaps I am wrong about this one; they say it’s the leaders that a responsible for keeping them training in warfighter tasks, and that means me… and by now we know that people of my caliber are always on top of it… I also have some ocean front proporty in Nebraska if your interested.
Anyway, as Big Time and myself further discussed, the last Army who went around doing this sort of thing (destroying a country, rebuilding the government in it’s image, military figures as envoys and provincial governors, actively sought to fix sewers, water, economy, education, trash disposal, military training, etc.) was the Romans. I just wish it was being spun to the American people in the same manner as it was spun to Romans: for the greater glory. It’s the lies, the propaganda, the spin that I don’t appreciate. Example: we are not an Army of occupation. Sure we aren’t. I’ll see you in ten years, twenty years, thirty years; in Baghdad. I’ll be the guy still in body armor in 114 degree heat with a dusty rifle.
So this conversation was had. And the next day we had a talk with some higher-ups in class as it seems that everyone nearing retirement wants to pass on a bit of all-important information that they have learned in their fifteen-to-twenty years in the military, along all of which most have managed to avoid combat. Trust me, what they have to say reflects that merit. For the most par. Nonetheless, it doesn’t halt those with rank telling those without as much what is the right thing to do. However on this day I decided, as you all can only image I do, to respectfully voice my opinions, more specifically, the opinions that I have listed in the above paragraph. Those listening nodded and asked me then if I had a better idea, and I said given this juncture - no.
The fact is that I understand why we are doing what we are doing, and that is the business of Nation Building. Okay, I got it; I understand the how and the why, but, and I told the gentlemen present, is that I don’t have to like it or agree with it. Yes, I realize that there is a conundrum there. If I don’t agree with it, and don’t have a better idea then I need to shut the fuck up. I would agree with that in most cases…. that is, if I had not voiced what we were doing was wrong sometime ago and offered up a solution then that would have been feasible then that unfortunately isn’t anymore.
Like I said, it’s about spin. If from the get-go President Bush had been straight and said we are going to do all these things, hang around, and mold this country in our own image I would have been okay. Oh wait, he did. What he failed to say this is the reason is for our interests. The spin that we are whirling about is this is some sort of humanitarian-aid-goodwill gesture to the Middle East. The spin is that we are just going to leave when this is all settled, shake hands, and go home. The spin is that we are making progress as these ambassadors of Democracy. If the Romans didn’t make progress, they killed those who didn’t progress. And yes, it worked for Alexander when he went through Arabia so I don’t want to hear this shit that it can’t be done. But that’s spin, and to be up front would dishearten many Americans who probably won’t believe in the Alexander the Great method of Nation Building. However, think about this: if we spent as much money on a media campaign here to get Americans behind some sort of Imperialist interest group for the sake of a better America verses the amount of money we spend on media campaigns trying to get the Iraqis to like us, I think that the term expeditionary might be a bit more common and catchy in everyday speech. At least it would with Katy Couric.
So we have to do what we do. But we didn’t have end up this way. This was all a well-planned march into a future 51st State, and if you don’t think so then consider this, what I think is, or rather was, a viable alternative: Iraq was formed by British Imperialist efforts during the turn of the century and actually formed and became a country in 1931. Even then it was divided and had to be ruled by force as the tribes and religious tensions were just too much. The main reason (eh-hem, excuse) that Washington gives for our continued presence in the region is that it would create a power vacuum and a safe-haven for terrorists. But what if their was no vacuum, that is, what if then there was no Iraq and therefor nothing to have power over?
Hear me out, because at one point this would have been a very real possibility with the only benefit to the United States being foreign relations, and in terms of globalization that is a lot cheaper than a corporate-take over, which is a way of looking at the current operation we are knee deep in the sand into. To start with once Saddam was gone from power, Iran was actually favorable to his removal and the American pressence. Remember, Saddam was a Bathist who’s main power base is Sunni. Iran is Shite. It created potential stability in the region for the Shite dominated Theocratic Nation; don’t forget that Iran and Iraq fought several times while Saddam was in power. That being said, the first thing that the US should have done was give a timeline to the restructuring of boarders that I am about to suggest, I offer up two years for groups to get moved and leaders to be elected by their tribes/families/governments/god/whatever.
First, we re-establish Kurdistan. That’s right, I said it, give the Kurds their own country again. That’s all they want right now, and that’s what they have always wanted. They have more than proved that they are capable of defending their land, they look more like Israelis than Muslims. Iraqis won’t even dream of wandering into Kurdish controlled provinces with malice if they value their heads, which the Kurds will literal claim and discard the bodies. Kurdish territories in Iraq are among the safest and most Westernized; they drink alcohol, listen to Western pop music, and their woman wear pants and sit outside in the day drinking coffee. Best of all, they see Americans in the way that the Afghanis sees Americans - as liberators. Anyway, I say we give them a country, weapons, training, aid, and most importantly, the Northern Oilfields; in exchange for a permanent military base in this new Kurdistan, which is even more of a gift due to the amount of money that Soldiers spend abroad historically. (over the last ten years, 30% of the entire German economy came from US Army bases) I say we give them all the way down to somewhere between Karkuk and Samarra. Make Mosul the Capital. Even make plans to get more of old Kurdistan back from what is now Turkey at a later date. (…fuck the Turks, they didn’t let us use their land to get into Iraq so they can lose something for who they aligned with. That’s how war works!)
Then we take South Iraq all they way through the Nan Najab province and give it to Kuwait. They have been our Allies through most of this shit storm anyway, I say they deserve what little port Iraq had on the Persian Gulf as well as all of the Southern Oilfields. Kuwait has been dealing in oil (and with us) for years and years now, so I say let them have it… in return for a permanent US Military base and port along the Gulf. Now, I know what you’re saying, what about the Iranians?
Give them, oh say, Eastern Iraq up to the Tigris south of but to include al-Kut. Not much, but it’s two proviences, which is quiet a goodwill gesture nonetheless, if that truly is the business of the US. Oh, and a quick comment on Iran’s Nuclear Program. Fact: 1 in 4 Iranians are addicted to some opiat or another. They have no missle program at all, at least not like N. Korea or anything, which means they can’t really reach out an touch anyone. Notice the US isn’t really panicked about this? That’s because they can’t hit us, just Israel or maybe Europe. Now, the UN is shitting bricks, but fuck those guys. If they want to act on the matter, they can just go in with their Army… oh wait, you don’t have an Army? Then you better shut the fuck up! In this situation, The USA will just give them some land in return for a few quick looks into Tehran and perhaps some other trading agreements. Besides, with that much of the country high, they are a bigger danger to themselves with a nuclear reactor right now, not the other way around.
Okay, what about the Sunnis, right? They are the ones that are the real fuck-holes over there. What about them? They can have what’s left. What’s left after we give about fifty miles of the Western boarder, right up to the suburbs of ar-Ramadi to Jordan. (that’s just for tension… it will play out later) All that we can give to the then empowered Sunni people. Give them Baghdad and Al Anbar and the scraps. Give them all that without oil and without anything but small arms for weapons. Now, you might think that this would have the Sunnis in a public outcry for US and UN aid, but I doubt it. Those Iraqis won’t take anything from us now, nor have they ever, I doubt like fun that it would change. Safe haven? Maybe, but for what? Guys on monkey bars? Dudes with AKs on the back of a beat ol’ pick-up? I’m so friggin’ scared. They try anything stupid, we just talk to our new buddy Iran and let them take a shot at the rest of the country with our blessing. That being said, the militant Sunnis will then have other things in this situation to think about then trying to hit a country on the other side of the world…. like the Kurds to the North who they gassed a few years ago. Like the Iranians who would love to take the City of Scholars as their own for religious reasons. Like the Jordanians who hold their land… and might want the rest. And like the Kuwaitis who would soon be as rich as the Saudis.
Vacuum solved. Two permanent bases in the Middle East for US Forces, possibly more later on - a beautiful exchange of East-meets-West in countries where they are wanted, nay, asked for by name. Exclusive trading rights if we play our cards right also with these countries… possibly even the goodwill we would need to get Israel excepted in the region. Okay, that might be pushing it, but it IS pushing it in the right direction. The fault in our way of thinking is that it is still Cold War oriented. We can trust these people not to become Communist, I think, and therefore they can do whatever they want for a government as long as it is favorable to the USA; Democracy would just be the humas on the pan bread.
