Hello_Kitten
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2002
- Posts
- 255
This appeared today in my local paper, written by a local associate professor. It's long but worth the read. I typed it out to send to a friend, it's not online so I don't have an Internet source to quote. I suppose if anyone really wants to question the validity of it I could scan the original article.
How are we hypocritical about this war? Let us count the ways.
Hypocrisy: Pretending to be what one is not. Saying one thing and doing another. Hypocrisy by the U.S. government is:
Claiming the war is for Iraqi freedom when for many years the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein, including the aggression against Iran. Of course, if the Kurds in the north choose autonomy or the Shias in the South want to be part of Iran, it won’t be allowed. And what if the Iraqis elect an anti-U.S. Islamist government? Will the three U.S. generals already assigned to rule Iraq allow that?
Claiming the war is for the Iraqi people. It is hard to believe the interests of the Iraqis is the reason for this aggressive war, since hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children have died in the past 10 years thanks to the U.S. sanctions which kept Saddam in power, but weak enough to attack when the chance came. Besides, the U.S. already has announced that Iraq will be rebuilt using Iraqi oil and contracts are being let to the U.S. oil companies for managing this – with a nice profit of course.
Claiming the war is for democracy when the U.S. supports the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (not a democracy), the Emirate of Kuwait (not a democracy), and labels Iran (where there is some democracy and people are struggling for more) part of the axis of evil. The only strong democracy bordering Iraq is Turkey and the U.S. tried to bribe it into supporting the war despite 90 percent of the population being against it. When the French and Canadian governments follow the will of their people and oppose the attack, we sneer at them.
Loyalty to our government should be more important, apparently, than their own democracy. Of course, around the world the U.S. supports dozens of horrible dictatorships (like the military rule of Pakistan, which is a nuclear power) and since World War II we have overthrown elected and popular governments in Iran, Guatemala, Chile and many other places. But then, those who were democracies we didn’t like. Recently the U.S. government rushed to endorse the coup in Venezuela that almost overthrew its elected government, which is trying to keep more of that country’s oil income at home.
Claiming the war is because Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, yet when Saddam used these weapons before against Iran we aided him with crucial military intelligence, even though we knew what he was doing. And the last time he used weapons of mass destruction, against his own people, the U.S. government immediately doubled his military aid.
Claiming the war is against weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. has more weapons of mass destruction than anyone, including the anthrax that was used on us in 2001. In new U.S. military policy our government says it has the right to use nuclear weapons not just to defend ourselves when attacked, but also as first use to defend ourselves against a conventional attack. Worse, we now claim the right to use nuclear weapons in a so-called “pre-emptive” (i.e. aggressive) war.
Claming the war is to protect the U.S. when Iraq has never attacked nor threatened the U.S. except when we were attacking it. There is no documented case of Iraq sponsoring terror attacks on the U.S.
Claiming the war is to protect the international community when the community over-whelming opposes it, and when we won’t support the World Court, the Kyoto Accords or the U.N. itself.
Claiming the war is just when it is a war of aggression. It is not even a pre-emptive war, since Iraq was not on the verge of attacking us. That millionaires’ club, the U.S. congress, doesn’t even have the courage to declare war as the Constitution mandates, and oilman Bush doesn’t have the courage to ask for such a declaration.
Pretending the war is to make the U.S. safer, when instead it has traditional enemies – the political Islamists (Osama and his ilk) and Nationalist-Socialist Arabs such as Saddam – together, it has turned most of the world against, and it has increased the chances for a terror attack on America.
But of course, such an attack would be an excuse for even more “security” measures and more attacks on our freedoms. It is no surprise that according to our government and many of our sunshine “patriots” we must give up or freedom in order to defend it.
Claiming to love our soldiers while cutting their benefits if they happened to have earned another government pension, as the Republican administration has just done. And the proposed budget of President Bush cuts the taxes for millionaires $90,000 a year while also significantly cutting veterans’ benefits.
Hypocrisy by U.S. citizens is:
Supporting the war and yet not knowing that al-Qaida and Saddam hate each other (instead of being allies as 42 percent of Americans believe) and thinking some of the hijackers were Iraqi (as almost half of Americans believe). A good citizen is not ignorant about our country’s wars, and they should know what is in the U.S. Constitution as well.
Saying you support our soldiers and then cheering them off to an undeclared, illegal, immoral war.
Saying you’re a patriot when you won’t think for yourself and instead slavishly accept every pronouncement the government spoon-feeds you.
Saying you believe in American values and those who don’t toe the government’s line should shut-up and move to Iraq.
Are we really supposed to believe that all these “patriots” saying “shut-up, don’t think for yourself just support President George” would have been patriots in 1776?
We know they would be Tories. Slavish and ignorant followers of authority are not lovers of freedom; they are not true patriots. The revolutionaries of 1776 knew that our own government was potentially the greatest threat to our freedom.
Lincoln and many others predicted that America would never be conquered, but rather it would fall within. Our government’s quest for empire and our fear of its consequences already have put the Constitution in peril.
Meanwhile Attorney General John Ashcroft secretly prepares “Patriot” Act II. As every great American leader (such as the recently quoted Teddy Roosevelt) has said, it isn’t our right to dissent from our government when we think it is wrong, it is our duty.
This analysis is not an attack on our brave soldiers. They are following orders, thinking that is what is best for America. They deserve better from their leaders and especially from their fellow citizens.
They deserve, at the least, to fight and die in a declared war. Why can’t they even have that?
Charles Hables Gray is an associate professor of Cultural Studies of Science and Technology and of Computer Science at the University of Great Falls. His most recent books include Postmodern War (1997) on contemporary conflict, and Information, Power and Peace (Routledge, 2002) on how new information technologies affect the chances for global peace.
How are we hypocritical about this war? Let us count the ways.
Hypocrisy: Pretending to be what one is not. Saying one thing and doing another. Hypocrisy by the U.S. government is:
Claiming the war is for Iraqi freedom when for many years the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein, including the aggression against Iran. Of course, if the Kurds in the north choose autonomy or the Shias in the South want to be part of Iran, it won’t be allowed. And what if the Iraqis elect an anti-U.S. Islamist government? Will the three U.S. generals already assigned to rule Iraq allow that?
Claiming the war is for the Iraqi people. It is hard to believe the interests of the Iraqis is the reason for this aggressive war, since hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children have died in the past 10 years thanks to the U.S. sanctions which kept Saddam in power, but weak enough to attack when the chance came. Besides, the U.S. already has announced that Iraq will be rebuilt using Iraqi oil and contracts are being let to the U.S. oil companies for managing this – with a nice profit of course.
Claiming the war is for democracy when the U.S. supports the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (not a democracy), the Emirate of Kuwait (not a democracy), and labels Iran (where there is some democracy and people are struggling for more) part of the axis of evil. The only strong democracy bordering Iraq is Turkey and the U.S. tried to bribe it into supporting the war despite 90 percent of the population being against it. When the French and Canadian governments follow the will of their people and oppose the attack, we sneer at them.
Loyalty to our government should be more important, apparently, than their own democracy. Of course, around the world the U.S. supports dozens of horrible dictatorships (like the military rule of Pakistan, which is a nuclear power) and since World War II we have overthrown elected and popular governments in Iran, Guatemala, Chile and many other places. But then, those who were democracies we didn’t like. Recently the U.S. government rushed to endorse the coup in Venezuela that almost overthrew its elected government, which is trying to keep more of that country’s oil income at home.
Claiming the war is because Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, yet when Saddam used these weapons before against Iran we aided him with crucial military intelligence, even though we knew what he was doing. And the last time he used weapons of mass destruction, against his own people, the U.S. government immediately doubled his military aid.
Claiming the war is against weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. has more weapons of mass destruction than anyone, including the anthrax that was used on us in 2001. In new U.S. military policy our government says it has the right to use nuclear weapons not just to defend ourselves when attacked, but also as first use to defend ourselves against a conventional attack. Worse, we now claim the right to use nuclear weapons in a so-called “pre-emptive” (i.e. aggressive) war.
Claming the war is to protect the U.S. when Iraq has never attacked nor threatened the U.S. except when we were attacking it. There is no documented case of Iraq sponsoring terror attacks on the U.S.
Claiming the war is to protect the international community when the community over-whelming opposes it, and when we won’t support the World Court, the Kyoto Accords or the U.N. itself.
Claiming the war is just when it is a war of aggression. It is not even a pre-emptive war, since Iraq was not on the verge of attacking us. That millionaires’ club, the U.S. congress, doesn’t even have the courage to declare war as the Constitution mandates, and oilman Bush doesn’t have the courage to ask for such a declaration.
Pretending the war is to make the U.S. safer, when instead it has traditional enemies – the political Islamists (Osama and his ilk) and Nationalist-Socialist Arabs such as Saddam – together, it has turned most of the world against, and it has increased the chances for a terror attack on America.
But of course, such an attack would be an excuse for even more “security” measures and more attacks on our freedoms. It is no surprise that according to our government and many of our sunshine “patriots” we must give up or freedom in order to defend it.
Claiming to love our soldiers while cutting their benefits if they happened to have earned another government pension, as the Republican administration has just done. And the proposed budget of President Bush cuts the taxes for millionaires $90,000 a year while also significantly cutting veterans’ benefits.
Hypocrisy by U.S. citizens is:
Supporting the war and yet not knowing that al-Qaida and Saddam hate each other (instead of being allies as 42 percent of Americans believe) and thinking some of the hijackers were Iraqi (as almost half of Americans believe). A good citizen is not ignorant about our country’s wars, and they should know what is in the U.S. Constitution as well.
Saying you support our soldiers and then cheering them off to an undeclared, illegal, immoral war.
Saying you’re a patriot when you won’t think for yourself and instead slavishly accept every pronouncement the government spoon-feeds you.
Saying you believe in American values and those who don’t toe the government’s line should shut-up and move to Iraq.
Are we really supposed to believe that all these “patriots” saying “shut-up, don’t think for yourself just support President George” would have been patriots in 1776?
We know they would be Tories. Slavish and ignorant followers of authority are not lovers of freedom; they are not true patriots. The revolutionaries of 1776 knew that our own government was potentially the greatest threat to our freedom.
Lincoln and many others predicted that America would never be conquered, but rather it would fall within. Our government’s quest for empire and our fear of its consequences already have put the Constitution in peril.
Meanwhile Attorney General John Ashcroft secretly prepares “Patriot” Act II. As every great American leader (such as the recently quoted Teddy Roosevelt) has said, it isn’t our right to dissent from our government when we think it is wrong, it is our duty.
This analysis is not an attack on our brave soldiers. They are following orders, thinking that is what is best for America. They deserve better from their leaders and especially from their fellow citizens.
They deserve, at the least, to fight and die in a declared war. Why can’t they even have that?
Charles Hables Gray is an associate professor of Cultural Studies of Science and Technology and of Computer Science at the University of Great Falls. His most recent books include Postmodern War (1997) on contemporary conflict, and Information, Power and Peace (Routledge, 2002) on how new information technologies affect the chances for global peace.
