Ask Questions - Get Answers [ Public Answers' Archive - Questions ]

Sunday 19th May 2024 05:00:50 PM

Home/Government/Politics

Question Board

Return to Question Board

Question Details	Asked By	Asked On
A Defeat For an Empire	Itsdb	12/22/04
by Robert Jensen The United States has lost the war in Iraq, and that's a good thing. I don't mean that the loss of American and Iraqi lives is to be celebrated. The death and destruction are numbingly tragic, and the suffering in Iraq is hard for most of us in the United States to comprehend. The tragedy is compounded because these deaths haven't protected Americans or brought freedom to Iraqis. They have come in the quest to extend the American empire in this "new American century." So, as a U.S. citizen, I welcome the U.S. defeat for a simple reason: It isn't the defeat of the United States -- its people or their ideals -- but of that empire. And it's essential that the American empire be defeated and dismantled. The fact that the Bush administration says we are fighting for freedom and democracy (having long ago abandoned fictions about weapons of mass destruction and terrorist ties) does not make it so. We must look at the reality, no matter how painful. The people of Iraq are better off without Saddam Hussein's despised regime, but that does not prove our benevolent intentions or guarantee that the United States will work to bring meaningful democracy to Iraq. In Iraq, the Bush administration invaded not to liberate but to extend and deepen U.S. domination. When Bush said, "We have no territorial ambitions; we don't seek an empire," on Nov. 11, 2002, he told a half-truth. The United States doesn't want to absorb Iraq or take direct possession of its oil. That's not the way of empire today; it's about control over the flow of oil and oil profits, not ownership. In a world that runs on oil, the nation that controls the flow of oil has great strategic power. U.S. policy-makers want leverage over the economies of competitors -- Western Europe, Japan and China -- that are more dependent on Middle Eastern oil. The Bush administration has invested money and lives in making Iraq a platform from which the United States can project power. That requires not the liberation of Iraq but its subordination. But most Iraqis don't want to be subordinated, which is why the United States in some sense lost the war on the day it invaded. One lesson of contemporary history is that occupying armies generate resistance that, inevitably, prevails over imperial power. When we admit defeat and pull out -- not if, but when -- the fate of Iraqis will depend in part on whether the United States makes good on legal and moral obligations to pay reparations and allows international institutions to aid in creating a truly sovereign Iraq. We shouldn't expect politicians to do either without pressure. An anti-empire movement -- the joining of anti-war forces with the movement to reject corporate globalization -- must create that pressure. We should all carry a profound sense of sadness at where decisions made by U.S. policy-makers -- not just the gang in power today but a string of Republican and Democratic administrations -- have left us and the Iraqis. But that sadness should not keep us from pursuing the most courageous act of citizenship in the United States today: pledging to dismantle the American empire. The planet's resources do not belong to the United States. The century is not America's. We own neither the world nor time. And if we don't give up the quest -- if we don't find our place in the world instead of on top of the world -- there is little hope for a safe, sane and sustainable future. Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin and the author of "Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity." He can be reached at rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu. © 2004 The Star-Telegram ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Comments?
Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 12/22/04 6:09 pm: PW, Yeah, it's a bit of a sore point for me. I have a cousin who just got called up last week. He's a PA reservist but there was a hole in a unit from an Ohio unit, and he had the qualifications to fill it, and was recent enough not to have to be retrained. So he's on his way over there now. Kind of a shock to all of us... his unit wasn't slated to go over for about another year or so. So when I hear this schmuck professor saying things like "its good if America looses the war," it REALLY pisses me off. Sorry if I was offensive. Elliot Clarification/Follow-up by purplewings on 12/23/04 6:15 am: Elliot, You weren't offensive at all. This Professor who wrote such garbage is the one who is offensive. He seems bloodthirsty in his hope to keep America humble. Crap is the word for his message. Have a nice day! Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 12/23/04 11:34 am: Hello Steve: Yeah, that's how their front guy's do it. I don't believe the vast majority of Muslims believe that, yet they support the radicals. I think the reason is political. I certainly hope so, otherwise we are definitely heading into a world wide religious war. excon Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 12/23/04 3:29 pm: Hello Elliot: >>>It isn't political... it IS the religious world war that you fear.<<< If it is, as you say it is, and I don't doubt that it is, then we are still fighting it wrong. If ALL of Islam and the Islamic countries are the enemy, then why are we f*ng around with our ground troops? We should have turned the desert into glass from the git-go - like I said. Look it up. excon Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 12/24/04 4:45 am: What we are attempting in Iraq is a big gamble for sure.Sowing the seeds of freedom on what is perceived as unfertile desert is not without risks. The critics say that it can't be done but if not now when? 100 years;1000 years ? Are the people to remain oppressed and subject to the will of either Fascist despots or Mullocracy forever ? Will we constantly have to put them down for our own security ? These are alternatives I do not want to contemplate .We have to succeed. Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 12/24/04 12:36 pm: ex, I have no doubt I'm right in my comments, but I didn't say "ALL of Islam and the Islamic countries are the enemy." But the ones who are, have no intention of giving an inch...which is why they must be defeated at all cost. Merry Christmas :) Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 12/29/04 12:54 pm:** Excon, I agreed with you then and I agree with you now. We should have nuked them back to the stone age. But given that we both know that we are not about to go nuclear (or even MOAB) on their butts, the only strategy left is the one we are using... and using pretty effectivly from a military standpoint. When taking into account politics, strategy, tactics and limitations, we are fighting this war exactly the way we should be. Elliot

Summary of Answers Received	Answered On	Answered By	Average Rating
1. Comments? Well, I think that it is a steaming pile of pooh. ...	12/22/04	Choux
2. Ah, another who wants peace. But the peace he seeks is the ...	12/22/04	drgade
3. Doesn't this writer realize that we are all connected in ...	12/22/04	purplewings
4. >>>Robert Jensen is a journalism professor<<< Well, you kno...	12/22/04	ETWolverine
5. 1. No matter how valued Jenson finds his own ideology, the f...	12/22/04	Yiddishkeit
6. UT is a public and not a private university ? Nice to know ...	12/23/04	tomder55
7. Hello Its: I read your question yesterday, but wanted to s...	12/23/04	excon
8. Hi, Another very long posted question..... America stands fo...	12/24/04	fredg

Your Options
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !

viewq © Copyright 2002-2008 Answerway.org. All rights reserved. User Guidelines. Expert Guidelines.
Privacy Policy. Terms of Use. Make Us Your Homepage. Bookmark Answerway.