Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was superior to anything Islam had developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions. Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'. Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.
Doom and gloom! 300.000 refugees! 30.000 dead per annum! Apocalypse now or at least soon! No hope! Millenialism! The ghastly parade of horrors from Iraq must mean that pre-emption, the war on terror, the Bush doctrine and the nasty neo-con imperialist strategy has utterly failed. As if war and defending civilization was as easy as drinking a latte at Elaine’s on the upper west side of liberal Manhattan. As one recent political commentator [Lt. Ralph Peters] stated after visiting Iraq, “During a recent visit to Baghdad, I saw an enormous failure. On the part of our media. The reality in the streets, day after day, bore little resemblance to the sensational claims of civil war and disaster in the headlines.” Mr. Peters knows as well as anyone that disasters, scandals, corruption and impending collapse are the staples of the media and political analysts. Pity. War is hard business and winning it is never easy but the cock-eyed politicization of important operations only harms our collective security and civilization. You can’t win the future if you constantly fight in the past. Iraq is not nearly as dire as we are told to believe.
The media feasts on any detours found on the rebuilding path from a failed fascist state to an Ivy league-led senescent, post-modern utopia. Yes there are problems – 30.000 dead civilians per annum, butchered by militia many of them Iranian armed; porous borders; a still immature Iraqi army; a corrupt Iraqi police force; a thieving government that siphons off US aid; and daily infrastructure terrorism. Yet annihilating a nexus of terror, money, weapons and training centers mandates hard and oftentimes bloody fighting, as well as logistical and administrative nightmares, twists and turns.
Besides the daily carnage positives do present themselves in the cauldron of Iraqi change and fire. Writing in Newsweek in July 2006 Middle East commentator Fareed Zakaria opined, “I don't see how Iraq's insurgency can win. It lacks the support of at least 80 percent of the country (Shiites and Kurds), and by all accounts lacks the support of the majority of the Sunni population as well. It has no positive agenda, no charismatic leader, virtually no territory of its own, and no great power suppliers. That's why parallels to Vietnam and Algeria don't make sense.” Certainly he has a point. Would 22 million people willingly march to the killing fields of an intellectually repressive and bereft fascist Islam, or a Hussein-style governance? Of course not. Will Sunnis and Kurds allow Iran to turn Iraq into a proxy state? Of course not. Will Iraq split asunder into 3 sub-units intent on civil war and revenge? Hardly. None of the above comports with reality and there is substantive evidence that the way forward while fraught with sweat and blood, will not end in tears.
Many provinces are quiet. The infrastructure is slowly being rebuilt and megawatt production in 2006 will exceed that of pre-2003. Oil revenues thanks to high prices are double what they were pre-2003. US aid has allowed the re-creation of agricultural output and the re-establishment of a nascent market economy. Economic growth is close to 20% per annum. Most Iraqi’s according to recent Pew polls feel secure and a majority are optimistic. The maligned Iraqi army is approaching 150.000 men and is taking over more operations. The current Prime Minister Maliki presides over a truly tri-partite based government and enjoys 80% support from the Iraqi people. The opportunity for improvement, security and lasting change is apparent.
Obstacles and challenges of course abound. The radical Shia militia led by Sadr [whose father an Iranian help caused the Lebanese civil war] must be eradicated. Borders have to be shut down. Iranian agents targeted for destruction. Counterfeit Iranian dollars which support militia activity must be seized. Sunni fanatics and Imams preaching hate must be destroyed. An oil revenue-sharing plan guaranteeing money to all 3 major groups [Kurds, Shias, Sunnis] should be agreed upon and implemented post-haste. Security and infrastructure build can only be successful when violence and government corruption are ended. Plainly there is plenty to do.
But such positivist thinking is not to be found in the public domain. With the collective memory capacity of a fruit fly, and the attention span of two year olds, the ‘experts’, media ‘pundits’, and retired generals, demonstrate with somber analysis that Iraq is a disaster and we must quit and run. Any sober, realistic and historically based analysis of the Iraqi and Afghani operations would reveal almost the opposite conclusion. In fact we need to stay 10 more years, increase our troop levels, secure the borders and deal with Iran. Such would be the adult analysis. We are not losing the war, but losing our minds instead.
The reasons to fight the fascistic elements of Islam, terror groups and their supporting states abroad are rather obvious. Not completing the job in 1991 led to the UN Oil for Food scandal and $60 billion in corruption which enriched not only Hussein but the current Iraqi ‘insurgency’ and various regional terrorist groups. The lost 1990s cost the US and the UK hundreds of billions in containment costs; Al Ansar of Al Qaida were training in northern Iraq improving their skills in the making of chemical weapons; terrorist groups matured and citing Western weakness launched dozen of attacks against Western targets including 9-11. Most importantly the 1990s also saw the reduction of US military spending; UN enfeeblement and the recent trebling of oil prices has only exacerbated the radicalization and reach of Iranian, Syrian and Saudi funding of terror world-wide. Fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan is the only option we currently have.
No one will make the argument that Iraq is a wonderful example of neo-imperialism. But such ventures are rarely clean. In essence and even with hindsight I would argue that Iraq is still the perfect place, albeit a bloody one, to prosecute the necessary regime change of states that sponsor fascist Islam and terrorism. There is no other choice. From our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq we will control and change the Islamic world. This will occur if we do what is necessary; keep our nerve; destroy the terrorist elements; add more troops; stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan and most importantly – recognize that these operations are mandatory for the security of Western civilization.
