AuthorsDen.com   Join | Login    
Where Authors and Readers come together!

SIGNED BOOKS    AUTHORS    BOOKS    SAMPLE CHAPTERS    AUDIOBOOKS    eBOOKS    STORIES    ARTICLES    POETRY    BLOGS    NEWS    VIDEOS    SUCCESS    TESTIMONIALS

Featured Authors:  Pamela Ackerson, iRochelle Brandon, iJ. Allen Wilson, iDavid Arthur Walters, iLisa DAnnolfo Levey, iFERIAL Haque, iJudith Bailey, iCheri Clifton, iTodd Cheney, iPamela Wiedenbeck, i

  Home > Essays > Articles Popular: Books, Stories, Articles, Poetry      Authors: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z     

Michael J Kahmann

 Follow Me  

· Contact Me
· Books
· Articles
· Stories
· Blog
· 10 Titles
· 11 Reviews
· Save to My Library
· Share with Friends!
·
Member Since: Apr, 2008

Michael J Kahmann, click here to update your pages on AuthorsDen.


Iraq after 9/11
by Michael J Kahmann   
Rated "PG" by the Author.
     
Recent articles by
Michael J Kahmann

• Widgets
• Insurance A Mess
• Give Me a Break / A Bathroom Break
• SAKS
           >> View all

Wrote this years ago - fun to stir the pot and revisit when your old.

 I was asked recently by someone overhearing a conversation how I could possibly be comfortable with our invasion of  Iraq.  Especially in light of how things have turned out.  Without excusing some tremendous blunders made by US invaders I would list three main reasons.  Technology; Get a map; and Oil.

 

TECHNOLOGY

 

The primary reason to invade Iraq was technology.  Why did so many of our leaders sign on to the invasion?  Because in the aftermath of 9/11 they had to face a fact that they normally could ignore; there are countries in the world that are or were wealthy enough to afford nuclear or CBR weapons.  And of these countries there are some who would sell this technology to those who had recently had to settle for passenger jet missiles. 

 

The seriousness of the threat cannot be overblown when one contemplates the explosion of  a low yield nuclear device in any of our major cities.  And who would we retaliate against as all the countries in the nuclear community throw up their hands in the not-me posture.  When we looked around on 9/12 wondering where or when the next blow would fall our eyes had to go to Afghanistan as the incubator and trainer of personnel.  Next would be countries that either have the technology or could afford to get it.  North Korea has it.  Libya had some and could afford more.  Pakistan certainly has people who would kill Musharef and export nuclear technology to terrorists if they could.  But most of these countries have self-interest issues which would prohibit them from a direct involvement in a serious attack on the US. 

 

Then there’s Iraq.  Who remembers John Bull and his cannon?  Why did Iraq buy two nuclear reactors from the French?  Why did the Israelis take out one in France and anger Jimmy Carter with a daring raid on the other one?   Saddam Hussein, in the spirit of his idol Nasser, was intent on being the Power in the mid-east.  As soon as he consolidated his political power in Iraq he attacked Iran.  When that didn’t go as planned (after ten years of bloody war) he attacked his neighbor Kuwait.  All along, flush with oil money, he pursued his goal of technological weaponry, nuclear and CBR.  His target however was not the US, it was Israel. 

 

Which brings us to some ground rules regarding the mid-east: 

 

No country will be allowed to invade or capture Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or the Arab Emirates. Nor will they be allowed to obstruct the Straits of Hormuz.  Neither the US or Europe will allow this to happen.  Any country that attempts such a strategy will find themselves at war with the West. 

 

No country will be allowed to attack and destroy Israel.  Any country that seriously threatens Israel’s existence will find themselves at war with the US. 

 

 

Hussein, not understanding these basic tenants of mid-east geopolitics, proceeds to try and violate both.  He acquires some nuclear technology but can’t keep his hands off of his neighbors.  His invasion of Kuwait stands as one of the more classic blunders in the region.

 

And why is this germane to his deposition by the US?  It’s the technology that he didn’t really have.  After the Coalition defeated his army in the mother of all routs he had to make some hard choices.  With the sanctions imposed he could not afford to enrich himself and his family and friends and still continue to develop the weaponry he desperately wanted.  But why make an issue of such a small matter.  It was a source of pride to him that the West (mostly the US) was fearful of what technology he might be hiding in light of what he was known to have had.  And this turned out to be the mother of all blunders for him. 

 

Along comes 9/11 and now the US starts taking a hard look at who can hurt us and how.  The US will no longer wait to see what the next round of suicide attackers will bring.  Naturally the focus, like the eye on a dollar bill, falls on the loosest cannon in the region, Iraq.  Now we are at an historical junction.  The only thing that will save Hussien’s regime now is if he were to come clean about what weaponry he has, and of course he won’t.  And technology is the key.  The US is not afraid of his army or what he might try next in his own neck of the woods.  But what the US is afraid of is the extent and disposition of his technology. 

 

 

 

GET A MAP

 

This much the US knew about what had happened to us on 9/11.  The root source of the attack lay in the mid-east.  The debate about the causes will rage for a long time to come but there was no debate about location.  So now comes probably the greatest emphasis on threat assessment since the second world war.  Where do we put our resources; boots on the ground, air power, naval deployment etc.…  Again the big question is which of the countries has the greatest potential to do us the most harm.  Iran has been stirring the pot for a long time but they do not have nuclear technology.  Afghanistan must be cleaned out but that’s not a hard decision.  Pakistan could be a terrible problem but for now is governed by an ally.  Syria does not have any technology that poses a direct threat to US, but what about Iraq?  The check marks start to add up.  Iraq spent a fortune acquiring nuclear technology.  How far have they come?  They threw out the UN inspectors.  Were they getting too close to something?  They used some form of mustard gas and some type of VX nerve agent on the Iranians and the Kurds.  And as anyone familiar with real estate will tell you there is the fact of location.  Iraq stands in the path of anyone wanting to traverse the mid-east with impunity.  If as a super-power you felt a severe threat from forces in the mid-east (perhaps a 9/11 scenario), what better place to have a standing army. 

 

 

Oil:

 

Oil.   Yes, oil.   Whatever went before in the mid-east, a simple fact Americans have to face is that a large part of our economy is predicated on relatively cheap petroleum.  We can all agree to disagree on who the hell’s fault that is but it won’t change the fact that we are hooked.   

 

This then leaves us with two difficult choices:  1) We can maintain a political and, when necessary, a military presence in the mid-east or: 2) We can stop filling up our cars (aircraft, boats, RV’s, etc.…) with their oil.    If you want to unilaterally withdraw our diplomats and troops from that region of the world, then ride a motor scooter to work and buy a log-spliter.   No great nation in the history of the world has ever had the luxury of defending only its borders.  Great nations by definition must preserve their hegemony or be ushered from the pages of history.

 

Fill ‘er up!

 


Want to review or comment on this article?


Need a FREE Reader Membership?
Reviewed by Ronald Hull
Reviewed on June 9, 2016
You make a cogent argument to rationalize what we did as a result of fear arising from 9/11 where a small group of Saudi backed Egyptians used commercial airlines to inflict tremendous pain on the financial center (primarily Jewish) and our military (the Pentagon). The fear alone reached irrational portions leading to Homeland Security and all the other fear induced activity that ensued.

The fact is that the American people listening to Colin Powell at the United Nations were hoodwinked by a group of conniving industrialists in the White House into believing that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction readily available to use against your targets: Israel, the Strait of Hormuz or one of the Middle Eastern oil producing states. What resulted was "shock and awe" and an exercise in real war use of our military superiority inflicting countless collateral damage on civilian populations leading to more and more individual desire for revenge and the increase of terroristic cells everywhere we put our "superior" military might.

We all die at some point. Some of us die by accident before our time. Some of us die from totally irrational terroristic activity like 9/11. But there's no reason for any of us to die from war unless there is a imminent threat to our well-being like there was in World War II and certainly during the long and painful Cold War with the Soviet Union. To quote President Obama: "… We can absorb more 9/11s…" It's a small price to pay for being an open, free and non-militaristic super country--not a super "power." War does nothing but create more enemies and cause casualties among our soldiers now committing 22 suicides a day.

As for oil. The Saudis and Emirates are investing their money in real estate and other holdings throughout the world in a smart move because they know their oil is a dead commodity. The Germans, having faced an oil shortage during World War II, plan to be free from nuclear, coal and oil by 2030. Chile is already exporting solar power because they are producing so much. We are busy justifying the need for more military power and using oil and gas create, "jobs."

We need to stop justifying bad wars and our need for oil and work on meeting the tremendous problem of stopping our war on the planet and people we don't seem to like for various unreasonable reasons.

Ron

Reviewed by Eva Pasco
Reviewed on June 8, 2016
A succinct review in perspective for the big picture of the middle east.

Popular Essays Articles
  1.  Where Have All the Authors Gone?
  2.  The Advent of ALICE 1.0 Advanced Logis
  3.  War and the Earth we need to live on.
  4.  An Era of Stupidity and the Challenge
  5.  Down with Group Chat
  6.  Critical Race Theory & the 1619 Projec
  7.  Needed: A Progressive Grand Strategy t
  8.  Less Words, More Results
  9.  Takeaways from Adam Smith's The Wealth
  10.  Mr. Trump, have you no sense of decenc
  11.  The Crisis of Opioid, Fentanyl, Cocain
  12.  Verifying Ones Self
  13.  Where, oh where, has my Porsche dream
  14.  Critical Race Theory
  15.  Just a Kid
  16.  Super Spreaders Disguised as Congressm
  17.  Daylight Saving: Stop Legislating the
  18.  Are You Writing for Me?
  19.  The Compassion of Christ
  20.  Why Excessive Inequality Matters
  21.  Bone-headed Supreme Court Decisions
  22.  Rhode Read: RI’s Tobacco-Based Wealth
  23.  Genghis Khan Rides Again!
  24.  The Cozy Mystery: Death by a Thousand
  25.  American Fascism and the Bush Administ

Free Book Review Program
Select a book to read and review today!

Democratic Dilemmas and Divine Inspiration (A Kindle Short) by Aberjhani

Democratic Dilemmas and Divine Inspiration examines the significance or relevance of the idea that the U.S. Constitution was, as many believe, divinely inspired. How much did that belief matter to founders of the nation and how much does it matter no  
Member BookAds

RAM: Random Articles and Manuscripts by Jay Dubya

RAM: Random Articles and Manuscripts, a non-fiction collection of 38 stories and essays, is author Jay Dubya's 32nd book.  
Member BookAds

RAM: Random Articles and Manuscripts by Jay Dubya

RAM: Random Articles and Manuscripts, a non-fiction collection of 38 stories and essays, is author Jay Dubya's 32nd book.  
Member BookAds