Political Notes #5

California Expert Software

Truth is Everything

LA BREA

Those who have passed through Los Angeles, staying even a few days, probably know about the famous La Brea Tar Pits. These are bodies of nearly pure oozy, sticky pitch, brooding near the surface. The nearby museum displays former denizens of Southern California which we clever modern men have dragged up from the Pits' depths. There are bones of saber tooth tigers, mammoths, giant sloths and hundreds of other unfortunates caught in this trap for the unwary, greedy or foolish.

A large mammoth needs some water, and ambles over to a pool. Elephantine creatures love to bathe in the water, but this pool pulls them down and drowns them. A large cat or a coyote sees an easy meal in the pile of dead meat near the edge of the pool. Wading in and taking a bite, these animals lust for their last meal. So it was for many others until modern times.

La Brea stands as a monument to the grandeur of California's history, and a moral tale, for all who see it. It also reminds us that California lies over pools of oil, although these are not large by world standards. 12,000 miles and a world away, almost exactly opposite California in the northern hemisphere, Iraq floats on pools of oil, which are large by world standards. But, Iraq does not have a La Brea to warn those who tread on that land.

Unheeded Warnings

Shortly after George W Bush became President, the neo-conservatives - Vice-President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Defense Policy Board member Richard Perle and other collaborators - starting agitating and planning for an invasion of Iraq. After the Al Qaeda attack on September 11, 2001, this idea was put on track to implementation sometime in Spring, 2002. How to deal with Iraq was a main topic of discussion at the President's Crawford, Texas ranch in August, 2002. It is clear that by September, 2002, a decision had been made to invade Iraq and depose Saddam Hussein. No one knows exactly why this decision was made.

Serious, open political debate on Iraq began in August, 2002 and is still in progress. Even though the United States accomplished its conquest of Iraq in April-May, 2003, US occupation and control of Iraq is still in question.

Prior to the invasion of Iraq, the Bush Administration was publicly and privately advised NOT to do it. I, and many others far more expert than me, warned the Middle East was a trap. Here's what we said:

Saddam Hussein is an evil man, but he was contained. The Iraqi government was unable to inflict much damage on its neighbors or the United States. It is true that Hussein's tyranny resulted in many thousands of Iraqi deaths every year, but even the mass murders were declining as a result of International pressure. Foreign invasion and overthrow of the Baathist regime would probably cause even more death and destruction than leaving a weakened Hussein in power.

Even though Iraqis were ruled by a despot, Hussein was Arab. The Arab and Islamic worlds are hyper-sensitive about Western - meaning, CHRISTIAN - supervision, control or influence. Militant Arabs believe the Crusades are not over, and the Caliphate (Ottoman Empire) must be resurrected. Thus, Christian forces and, indeed, all Infidels, must be expelled from Muslim lands. This is merely the modern extension of an old Islamic policy: all subjects must swear allegiance to Allah, or die. Invading Iraq would, therefore, only galvanize militant Arabs, Al Qaeda, pro-Iranian Shiites and others into actively opposing the United States.

The Saudis, under the influence of Wahabbism, strongly resented the presence of Americans on their soil - especially American troops. Last year, it was already clear Saudi Arabia was moving to expel US troops. When it became clear that the US would invade Iraq, the expulsion was announced. This act fits the difficulty Saudis have explaining their connection to the 9/11 terrorists, high level funding of Al Qaeda, and the slow investigation of the Kovar Towers bombing. It should be clear that Americans aren't welcome in many Arab lands.

While Syria voted for UNSC RES 1441, renewing a rigorous regime of inspections in Iraq, it thereafter opposed any further American intrusion into Iraq. From the beginning, it was clear the Security Council majority was being badgered by the United States to take action in Iraq. Discussion of Saddam Hussein's regime was not brought up by any other power, and even the Brits merely followed the American lead. The re-introduction of inspectors into Iraq was entirely the doing of the United States. (I believe the Council members voted for Resolution 1441 in hopes of appeasing the Americans.)

Reading the news between September, 2002 and April, 2003 makes clear that President Bush was going to declare war on Iraq no matter what. Pentagon officials announced their preparations for war week by week, troop movements were widely reported, and deadline dates for the invasion were announced. The UN inspections in Iraq were a sideshow as the troops were shipped and marched forward. The President and his men were hell bent on having a war, without support of traditional allies. In fact, the Bush Administration unwisely alienated and denounced the continental powers, "Old Europe," and even a somewhat sympathetic Russia.

If the goal was to gain control of Iraqi oil, and thereby ruin OPEC, then US forces would have to occupy Iraq - and maybe other Middle Eastern countries - indefinitely. Even turning Iraq into a pro-Western state implies some sort of long term "tutelage." Thus, invading Iraq amounts to openly adopting an Imperialist stance, the Pax Americana. This is (almost) unprecedented in US history, and not in accord with traditional American foreign policy. Invading Iraq not only sets the precedent that the US will engage in premeditated, pre-emptive attacks, but completely undermines the trust our allies had in American promises of prior consultation.

There was no evidence whatsoever the Iraqi government had official contacts with, or sponsored, Al Qaeda. The red herring about the meeting in Prague was repeatedly floated, caught and sent to the fertilizer factory.

There was no evidence the Iraqi government possessed nuclear weapons, or the means of making nuclear weapons. The "evidence" presented by the Bush Administration was found to be forged (the Niger yellowcake purchase) or irrelevant (the aluminum tubes).

There was no evidence the Iraqi government had other weapons of mass destruction (WMD); i.e., chemical and biological weapons. The Iraq government stated those weapons had been used prior to the Gulf War, or destroyed thereafter. The UN Inspectors found few remains or indications of WMD in 2002-03.

Despite these and other arguments, warnings and considerations, President Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq last Spring. The Pentagon wanted to have its war before Summer's heat arrived in Iraq. And so it was, the Conquest of Iraq being completed in about 1 month.

The lure of a dying beast, easy prey deliciously cooked in oil, was too much for the predatory beasts occupying the White House.

Tar Baby

Inevitably, natural forces operate on us all. Things take the course nature allows, even if for a short time we humans make it otherwise.

After our military pounced on the Iraqi beast, there they were, stuck to a Tar Baby. We had been warned about such things since childhood by Br'er Rabbit and his friends. America got in, but can't get out. One by one, all the warnings are coming true. What to do?

The United States cannot just jump out of Iraq; that would leave a power vacuum. Most likely, the pro-Iranian Shiites would rise to power if the US quits, exactly the opposite of Wolfowitz's goals. Leaving Iraq unreformed will also show the limits of American power, and encourage more challenges to it.

We can't stay there, because we don't have enough soldiers for a long term, ground occupation. Please recall that the Pentagon's mantra for several years - under both Democrat and Republican Administrations - has been modernization. Ground wars were supposed to be things of the past, now that the Soviet Union was gone. The American military would become high-tech, remote control warriors in every respect. The ordinary grunt was a thing of the past. Unfortunately, Iraq doesn't fit fantasies of Empire.

It is often said that generals plan for the last war. Right now, the American conquistadores would be better off had they done so. More importantly, the improved lesson is: "You often get hit where you least expect it."

We also can't stay there because we can't afford it. The old joke about, if you have to ask ..., applies. President Bush's recent $87 billion request to support Middle Eastern operations reveals America as an ingenue.

Help! Save me!

The trouble with tar, wherever found, is how it sticks. Ever tried getting the stuff off your car, after driving through new hot top? It will come off, with the paint and undercoat as well, or you just have to leave it.

Thus, the calls for help are going out, while American troops are increasingly caught in an unspoken jihad declared by an invisible enemy. President Bush believes old friends and allies will rush to his aid and pull his men off the tar. The more stuck, the louder the plaintive calls. So it will go, until, without aid, the victims are hungry, thirsty and hoarse. Then their pleas will less heard, and then not heard at all.

The public discussion of the last few weeks has been about PROTECTING US troops. Consider how amazing that is: the best equipped, most powerful soldiers in the world need protection against unseen, lethal agents in Iraq.

Supposedly these agents were directed by Hussein's sons; but now they are dead and the attacks continue. Supposedly, the "dead enders" were concentrated around Tikrit; but attacks occur in North and South Iraq as well. Supposedly ... Supposedly ... and the deaths of Americans go on.

The immediate question is why or how could anyone save those who are stuck? It's painful to hear the cries for help, knowing everyday someone is in pain, and dying. It is demoralizing and depressing. But what are we to do? Grab the tar baby ourselves? Jump into the tar pit? The truth is, our deaths would only be assured by doing those things; those would be useless sacrifices. Paying someone else to do it is just as ineffective. So it seems the only ones who can do the saving are those who are damned.

This means, in the end, those occupying Iraq will have to try walking out. Not everyone will make it, but that is the only way. Sending in saviors won't work - that will just add to the death toil. Anyway, how can there be saviors of those already the best equipped to be saviors?

It also means the longer the occupation goes on, the more lives and treasure will be lost. In the investing world, the conventional wisdom for this situation is 'cut your losses and get out.'

Anyway

One of the most distressing happenings is things turning out the way you worked so hard to prevent. It's the child you've spent your life and fortune socializing, who turns bank robber. It's the weeds that almost overnight crowd out your prize vegetables. It's the bush you've trimmed and trimmed, and still puts out branches and tops where you don't want them.

It just seems some things are meant to be; they are what happens anyway. No one can do anything about it. The outcome seems inevitable in retrospect, even though it was not clearly predictable. These are the sorts of things that makes life and history seem "pre-ordained" or "predestined."

Now, I don't want to go too far with this. There are lots of things that just happen that weren't predicted and don't seem inevitable. Auto accidents, for example. Nonetheless, it's worth considering "anyway" things, even if not everything happens anyway.

Looking back, most people can see that it wasn't worth the effort to change something that was going to happen anyway. Sometimes this is very hard to accept, as when a parent sees a much loved child go bad. The main reason people don't accept inevitable outcomes is vested interest, emotional, financial and social. But, when there is not a close interest, most people are able to "see" the path that leads from A to B to C; some even discover it without tutoring.

Most of us regret spending so much time on things that didn't work out. There was at least the opportunity cost, and very often dashed hopes as well. It's really hard to give up dreams; sometimes I still daydream 'what if things had turned out thus ...' There are the other things we might have done, things more to our advantage or liking. Despite all that, it is the way it is. Backwards 'que sera sera.'

Museum Lessons

Returning to La Brea and its same opposite, Iraq, should we not ask what would happen anyway?

Looking at the fossils, preserved with hair and feathers, bones, food and all, just as they were thousands of year ago, we realize their fate was sealed the moment they entered those pools. No matter how pathetic and heart-rending the screams and moans, the tarry devil would grip them and slowly, slowly press the life out of them. Without a time traveling helicopter rescue team to lift them into the heavens, they were buried and well preserved forever at La Brea.

I wonder whether any rescue team is likely in Iraq?

If not, knowing what it is, why are we still there?

Sept 6, 2003

Last update: 11/02/2007