Consequences of interational political actions should be considered as well as simple 'actions' such as 'pulling out' of Iraq as if it was some sort of decision about sex and reporduction.
American strategy in Iraq for several years has been incomplete and of a patchwork composition to many outside observers. Is the policy of the Bush administration actually as ineffective a it seems and simply a patchwork effort of throwing truck loads of borrowed money at the problem such as followed the incompetent civil defense planing and response to the levees of New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina? Is it possible that some larger grand weltanshaung (world view) motivates the neo-con shaped Bush II policy that may be fulfilled by a Bush III administration or a Clinton II administration? Let's consider a few basic points of U.S. middle east policy during and following the cold war's end.
In taking the dialectically opposite side of communism the U.S.A. committed itself to a global war of capitalism versus communist economics and in so doing capitalist business methods became enshrined as an absolute good replacing democracy. Democracy for a time was subordinated to capitalist leadership in a global war for survival to become the leader of the New World Order. The world's politics were perceived as essentially a contest between the political powers of two European conceived social philosophies of Mark and Smith. Other demographic and environmental issues of greater absolute importance perhaps were subordinated and aligned with the dominant higher level issues. Environmental conservation for instance might be considered to be a socialist activity, and birth control a capitalist or communist policy variously as local needs for dissimulation deemed appropriate politically. The issues of the Muslim world combined with several other social and environmental challenges also were set aside as of secondary value. With the end of the cold war the occultation of the secondary issues ended, while the success of global capitalism surged ahead as the content of a New World Order; one in effect without a willing political base and advocated from the top by an elite ad hoc network of greed driven businessmen without any real feeling for governing. Without digressing here to describe how corporatism grew through the capitalist economic network to displace democracy in the United States and worked toward minimizing all free enterprise activities unsubordinated to rent paying to corporations
Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:
Consequences of interational political actions should be considered as well as simple 'actions' such as 'pulling out' of
War weary and embattled people?
The United States declared war on Iraq because Saddam Hussein would not comply with a weapons
Should we pull out of Iraq immediately. If we do, what are the consequences?
(Septe mber 17, 2007) It's probably safe to say
by Gary Betts
In the last 50 years, the United States has made a practice of cutting-and-running when the fighting gets too tough. And,
As an American citizen and person who has never been to Iraq, I do not feel that I can just say "Pull the troops out of
View All Articles on:
Should the United States pull troops out of Iraq and surrounding countries?
Add your voice
Know something about Should the United States pull troops out of Iraq and surrounding countries??
We want to hear your view.
Write now!
Cast your vote!
Click for your side.
Featured Partner
The Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions is a nonpartisan research and educational institute devoted to indi...more
hide