Tuesday :: Sep 5, 2006

Is the Iraqi War Lost?


by soccerdad

Paul Craig Roberts says yes.


The Pentagon's latest quarterly "progress" report to Congress on Iraq is a grim tale of a lost war. The Pentagon told Congress what Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and propaganda organs such as Fox "News" never tell the American public, namely:

The Sunni-based insurgency remains "potent and viable" despite spiraling Sunni-Shi'ite violence and beefed-up U.S. forces.
Since the last report three months ago, Iraqi casualties from "sectarian clashes" – the Pentagon's euphemism for civil war – have soared by more than 50 percent.
From May, when the new Iraqi government was established, until August, the average number of weekly attacks increased sharply to 800.
Since the previous report, Iraqi daily casualties have jumped by 50 percent from 80 per day to 120 per day. Currently, Iraqis are dying at the rate of 43,800 per year from violence.
The Iraqi government cowers behind the fortified walls of the "Green Zone." On Aug. 31, the Kurds in the north took down the Iraqi flag and replaced it with the Kurdish one. Most of Iraq is ruled by Shi'ite and Sunni militias. Conflict between them has forced 160,000 Iraqis to flee their homes.

He then goes on to demonstrate clearly that the Neocon's are now preparing for war on Iran.

I think Mr. Robert's article is very logical and therefore wrong. It is fundamentally flawed because it incorrectly assumes, from the viewpoint of the neocons, that the deaths of Iraqis are of consequence. To understand this one has to really come to understand the real purpose of the war. As I have said previously, the main goals of the invasion of Iraq were: 1. obtain control of the natural resources of the Middle East; control of the resources equals power, 2. find a physical place to deploy troops and aircraft given that they could not remain in Saudi Arabia and 3. project US power to the east, i.e. against China and Russia; power here refers not only to military power but power obtained by controlling valuable resources. The latter is crucial in their plan to exert influence on China.

Now in this context how are the neocons doing? Now there is no doubt that events have not unfolded as the neocons would have wished. I think one has to conclude that they are doing well if not as well as they had hoped. The Iraqi oil and gas is still in the ground. The long term bases in Iraq have, for the most part, been constructed. Lets not forget that the American city within a city, i.e. the embassy is progressing nicely.

Lets be clear, deaths of Iraqis, or for that matter Lebanese, Syrians, and Iranians are of no concern to the neocons. Remember this nugget from Sec. Rumsfeld back in 2004:

Iraq is making progress, he said. ?At some point the Iraqis will get tired of getting killed and we'll have enough of the Iraqi security forces that they can take over responsibility for governing that country,? he said. USA Today


Many talk of the Bush administration not being "in touch" with reality. But who's reality? The one thing you must come to grips with in order to understand where we are headed is that the neocons place absouletly no value on human life. Their goals involve power and maintaining that power. That hundreds of thousands (maybe even millions in the future)of innocent people have to die is literally of no concern or consequence to them.

Now ask yourself (assume their viewpoint for a second as disgusting as that is)is the US losing and will there be an attack on Iran? Finally, any blowback from such an attack will be used to justify their recent rhetoric. So exactly how do the neocons lose?

soccerdad :: 3:16 AM :: Comments (28) :: Digg It!