Bourgeois Deviant

Monday, December 12, 2005

Rummy Repeats History

Administration officials warn of impending caliphate; Rumsfeld says Iraq could "serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East, and which would threaten legitimate governments in Europe, Africa and Asia." (Wonkette)

This quote upsets me greatly. Has Rummy been bowling with and drinking the same water as Robert McNamara? Is the fog of war that thick again? This is EXACTLY the same rational for Vietnam during the cold war. America had to stop the spread of communism because it was a threat to freedom everywhere. Well, we know how the iron curtain turned out and it, despite the hype, we had little to do with its downfall aside from throwing a little fuel on the fires that eventually burned the curtain down.

How is it that our nation seems required to exist in opposition to an ideology? Rather, it is not my intent to endorse an Islamic caliphate, but oil aside, what business is it of ours how foreign lands end up governing themselves? This alarming prediction by Rumsfeld shouldn’t be alarming to us. A caliphate has been the intent of the islamists since Russia was in Afghanistan. America helped them then and thus fertilized the seed that is the beast we have emboldened an subliminally indulged with our foreign policies with respects to that region over the last forty years. Karma is a bitch that is paying us back ten fold, presently.

What is good for the goose is not always good for the gander. Seriously. History is repeating itself and rearing many ugly heads all at once, as I see it. We have an ugly redheaded stepchild of the White Man’s Burden in the spread of freedom and Democracy. Granted that freedom and Democracy are great things. However, they are learned, earned and developed over decades. Contrary to Bush’s ideologies on the matters at hand, no matter how he spins it, Iraq is not going to work out the way he, Rummy or any other of the Neo-Cons hopes it will.

Getting back to the criticism of the actual statement… The latter part : “a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East, and which would threaten legitimate governments in Europe, Africa and Asia." is a bit of a red herring. It is more likely that Pakistan and India would be threatened, but more immediately, the UAE and Soudi Arabia would be in the crosshairs even more than they are already. This threatens American resources. Resources, not stable governments are the primary concern. If governments were the primary concern, you would have seen more funding and more effort in Afghanistan. For Rumsfeld to include Europe, Africa and Asia is to add, rather, dramatically inflating the importance (unnecessarily) so that the illusion of altruistic effort is maintained in our campaign in Iraq. When has the Bush Administration ever demonstrated concern over other country’s anything? It is incongruous for Rumsfeld to say this. It wreaks of fallacy.

More lies, more double talk, more screwing the future of a once great country in a downward spiral.

2 Comments:

  • Bourgeois Deviant writes, "How is it that our nation seems required to exist in opposition to an ideology?"

    I think the answer can be found in the writings of Leo Strauss, philosophical granddaddy of neoconservatism:

    "Because mankind [sic] is intrinsically wicked he has to be governed: Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people."

    Ryan McGreal
    http://www.raisethehammer.org/

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, December 15, 2005 2:50:00 PM  

  • Ryan,

    If you ever re-check this post, please know that I am flattered as hell that you posted a comment. Thank you!

    By Blogger A. L. Deviant, at Monday, December 19, 2005 12:32:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home