Oh my...
So I had just written a very long entry in reaction to the war, politics in the Middle East, etc., and it was quite informative, but then I accidentally pressed some key and it all got erased. I will try to summarize what was on my mind at the last point.
Okay, so in a much shorter version, I was talking about terrorism and US policies in the mid east. ACtually, I was talking about what I think of the war, but at the end I was talking about terrorism, and it relates to the war, so I'll just rewrite that. Here is what I think:
We work in the Mid East largely because of economic interests. The terrorists, and Mid East people, hate us for interfering in their domestic affairs. For example: in 1950, the US overthrew the elected government of Iran to install the Shah, who has been a dictator ever since. We did this because the existing government was not friendly with its oil, whereas the Shah supported the US's oil interests. This was a root cause of the hostage crisis in Iran in the 70's. Terrorism, in short, is an exterme reaction to US economic policies in the Mid East. Terrorists are certainly wrong, and they directly kill innocent people, but we need to see that we are wrong too, and our policies (ie., supporting dictators) indirectly kill innocent people (an example of this: the CIA staged a coup against the Socialist President-elect of Chile in the 70's, and then supported the Pinochet government that replaced it; that government kidnapped and murdered thousands of "opponents," similar to the Stalinist purges of the Soviet Union).
We support dictators and governments that treat their people badly if they are supportive of our oil interests. Saddam treats his citizens badly, too, but would we be going to war with Iraq if he shared Iraq's oil with us? I don't think so. He has weapons of mass destruction. North Korea has nukes that can reach LA, and that are pointed at LA (and Japan). But you never hear about the US trying to make N.K. disarm, and I think that is largely because it also has nothing to offer us, by way of economics or resources. Also, the CIA has denied that the Iraqi government supports or sponsors terrorism, whereas there is evidence that the governments of Iran and Saudia Arabia DO. But we won't put pressure on them because they're oil buddies! So terrorists hate us because we interfere over oil a lot in the Mid-East and mess a lot of things up. And because they're radicals and lots of them are crazy. But I think the real point is, this isn't a good vs. evil, black and white issue. It is portrayed that way by the media and government, but there are a lot of grays there, too.
Really, I am afraid the whole thing is going to result in a big mess that will open America to much more serious terrorist attacks, because the plan, a Japanese-style occupation of Iraq, isn't going to go over too well with probably any conservative to rightist Muslim person in the Mid East. It would be nice if we could build a government based on the people there, and let the people rule themselves, but I think we are going to focus on our own oil interests rather than on what is best for the Iraqi people. I guess we'll see.
Okay, so in a much shorter version, I was talking about terrorism and US policies in the mid east. ACtually, I was talking about what I think of the war, but at the end I was talking about terrorism, and it relates to the war, so I'll just rewrite that. Here is what I think:
We work in the Mid East largely because of economic interests. The terrorists, and Mid East people, hate us for interfering in their domestic affairs. For example: in 1950, the US overthrew the elected government of Iran to install the Shah, who has been a dictator ever since. We did this because the existing government was not friendly with its oil, whereas the Shah supported the US's oil interests. This was a root cause of the hostage crisis in Iran in the 70's. Terrorism, in short, is an exterme reaction to US economic policies in the Mid East. Terrorists are certainly wrong, and they directly kill innocent people, but we need to see that we are wrong too, and our policies (ie., supporting dictators) indirectly kill innocent people (an example of this: the CIA staged a coup against the Socialist President-elect of Chile in the 70's, and then supported the Pinochet government that replaced it; that government kidnapped and murdered thousands of "opponents," similar to the Stalinist purges of the Soviet Union).
We support dictators and governments that treat their people badly if they are supportive of our oil interests. Saddam treats his citizens badly, too, but would we be going to war with Iraq if he shared Iraq's oil with us? I don't think so. He has weapons of mass destruction. North Korea has nukes that can reach LA, and that are pointed at LA (and Japan). But you never hear about the US trying to make N.K. disarm, and I think that is largely because it also has nothing to offer us, by way of economics or resources. Also, the CIA has denied that the Iraqi government supports or sponsors terrorism, whereas there is evidence that the governments of Iran and Saudia Arabia DO. But we won't put pressure on them because they're oil buddies! So terrorists hate us because we interfere over oil a lot in the Mid-East and mess a lot of things up. And because they're radicals and lots of them are crazy. But I think the real point is, this isn't a good vs. evil, black and white issue. It is portrayed that way by the media and government, but there are a lot of grays there, too.
Really, I am afraid the whole thing is going to result in a big mess that will open America to much more serious terrorist attacks, because the plan, a Japanese-style occupation of Iraq, isn't going to go over too well with probably any conservative to rightist Muslim person in the Mid East. It would be nice if we could build a government based on the people there, and let the people rule themselves, but I think we are going to focus on our own oil interests rather than on what is best for the Iraqi people. I guess we'll see.