Al,
And we attack a country that had nothing to do with it, while our president and his closest advisers sell the notion that it did... yes...it is idealistic to think that such things should not happen
I wasn't the most enthusiastic about Iraq war, so I don't think I am the best person to defend it.
But my take on it is that it is related to the solution of the terrorist problem - even if tangentially.
First, let's review what the problem is. The problem is the fanatical Wahhabi brand of Islam that is producing the likes of Bin Laden, and is sponsoring (with the oil dollars) the militant islamist philosophy throughout the islamic world.
But how do you fight it? Head on? Attack Saudi Arabia? That may not be the best idea, because right now, the House of Saud may be realising the monster they have created, and they are considering cracking down.
I think this is why Bush is maintaining friendly relationship with the princes, moved the bases away, to make it easier on them. If the house of Saud, through their self interest of preserving their monarchy becomes the ally against Wahhabi, so much the better, as they would be the ones "fighting", or de-clawing the Wahhabis.
I am not sure if the Saud are committed yet. Let's wait and see.
Anyway, how is Iraq related to all of this? Somewhat tangentially. Iraq is not really (or did not used to be) on the front line with Al-Qaeda, but it was more connected to the non-fanatical, non-Wahhabi world. This part of the world needs an example of a functioning, prosperous, modern Islam society (I don't know Turkey counts, since it is too different from the rest of the Arab/Muslim world).
As Jeffrey Pipes said, the way you fight fanatical militant Islam is to make them moderate, peace-loving. So there has to be an alternative. Iraq is a convenient target, to become that alternative, convenient for multiple reasons.
Anyway, that is my read of the neo-con plan:
- attack Wahhabi/Talliban on the battlefield of Afghanistan
- cut of the source of their funding ("charities")
- make Saudi's cut off the funding as well
- hopefully, sign up Saudis against Wahhabi
- provide alternative (Iraq)
- give another shot to resolving Palestinian conflict (low probability of success
Iran is another variable in the equasion. What do you think would be a better way to depose the ayatollah's than an example of Shiates living in an open, non-totalitarian state, right across the border?
You know, all I hear is criticism, but I yet to hear an alternative strategy from any of the critics.
Joe |
