The state of the union speech suggested …
There has been a massive amount of activity within the government and the administration over the past several weeks and it is time for a review to determine if any progress has resulted. I am going to come at the situation with some commons sense ideas—and not as a democrat or a republican.
The state of the union speech suggested that the President is holding strong to the view of sending in another 20,000 troops to quell the factional warring in Iraq. In fact, the troops are now on station. The Commander and Chief has put congress in a tough spot—even though the democrats hint that they will withhold the funding to support this effort in the long term, they probably cannot really take such action. They fear that the American public would see them in a situation of non support of the troops. This is not a good place to be politically. So the funding will probably be there and the deployment will complete and we will lose more youngsters in the civil war in Iraq.
Is it apparent that politics and political agendas come before common sense and responsible action? Why do we continually lose sight of the goal? And the goal is to quell terrorism, but how?
Iraq and Terrorism in America
Does Iraq have anything to do with terrorism penetrating our shores? Five years ago it probably had very little if anything to do with terrorism in America. What about today? With the fire we have built in the Middle East through our actions in Iraq, I am afraid that we have stoked the embers of terrorism beyond even the expectation of the terrorist factions. The entire region could blow up leading to major issues and we may have caused such conditions to develop and exist through our irresponsible action by invading Iraq.
I have decided that I am going to stop complaining about the situation. I am simply going to state some ideas that I have offered before and that still seem legitimate to me.
Let us get to the bottom of this situation…
The situation in Iraq finds us caught in the midst of a civil war. It is true that some of the combatants are criminals and thugs but essentially it is Sunnis and Shiites battling each other for control.
Let us get to the bottom of this situation by asking---what is it that they are trying to control? Could it be that the warring factions are vying for position to take control of a “new government” beyond the one in place? Could it be that such control would allow the nationalization of the oil industry and the faction in power would benefit from the oil production? It makes common sense to me and so I am going to adopt the idea.
By inaction the government has marginalized every Iraqi citizen…
In an earlier writing I suggested that the Alaska model be imposed in Iraq---which means get the oil industry moving and pay every citizen a stipend from the oil revenues. But the current government either cannot or will not turn this solution to action. By inaction the government has marginalized every Iraqi citizen and said to them “no oil money for you.”
So what is likely to occur? Someone will rise to the top of the heap, and I have very little confidence that it will be the government currently in power---because I don’t believe they are in power at all. They show very little leadership and no solutions to existing problems. They have rigor mortis.
I believe that President Malaki and his colleagues are waiting for the “other shoe to drop.” The other shoe being “who will be the last man standing.” Once that is sorted out and a strong man is identified, they (Malaki and his people) will join with the victorious rebellious leader. But there is a danger in this scenario for the current government---the strongman may take out Malaki and his regime. In any case, once the real leader emerges and takes power the game will begin.
What is the game?
Oil is the game!
Oil will flow from the wells and cash will flow and the government in place will benefit and the common man will miss out on the entire show. It will be back to normal in Iraq and all of our attempts at rescuing this country and bringing democracy to it will fail. Why? The Iraqi’s are not culturally ready for democracy and all of its complex machinations. They don’t have the foggiest notion as to what it means, can’t get their arms around it, democracy is not culturally in tune with life in Iraq--plain and simple--it is a square peg in a round hole.
Why did the modern day whiz kids not see this coming—the big thinkers in Defense and State and the White House? They didn’t want to see it because their arrogance and righteousness caused them to believe that everyone loves the “American model” and that includes the Iraqis.
“Too pushy”
I recently traveled by cab from O’Hare airport to downtown Chicago and the taxi driver was from Jordon. He was a very articulate man and had earned a master’s degree from a prominent American University. He came off as a very bright man and he had an opinion about us Americans.
He simply said America is “Too pushy.” He said, “We Jordanians love the King of Jordon---we have loved him and his predecessors for many, many years. We don’t need democracy; we simply need a strong, just King.”
Sounds like the 1960s and Vietnam…
My call to the administration is---come home America they don’t want our help. Come home America and let us begin to solve our own problems. The administration’s answer to that is if we retreat from the Middle East we might find ourselves fighting terrorism at home. Sounds like the 1960s and Vietnam. The US Government and its whiz kids of that era had the fixation that if we abandoned Vietnam everything would come unglued. They insisted that if we left South East Asia that Cambodia, Laos, Thailand maybe even Indonesia would go communist.
Did it happen? No.
We are giving too much power and too much expertise to the international terrorists. They are simply not as good as we make them out to be. But, there is another problem and let me remind you folks in the administration that we already have terrorism at home. It is going on all around us primarily in our population centers. It is the gang phenomenon where gangs terrorize neighborhoods, fight for turf and the control of drug distribution systems. This form of terrorism is as bad as that found in troubled sectors of Baghdad. But the administration would prefer to fix Iraq rather than fix New York City, Los Angeles and Chicago.
The blogger and Uncle Sam
Let’s play a game for a moment and generate some questions and answers between the blogger and Uncle Sam.
First the blog writer:
How would the administration respond to the idea of it attacking and destroying terrorism in our streets idea?
The administration would say:
You don’t understand Mr. Blog Writer---we are talking about international 9-11 style terrorism.
I would say:
Come home and fight international terrorism from our shores through political, diplomatic, economic actions as well as vastly improved intelligence efforts.
Spend the next 94 billion dollars on re-building a worldwide human intelligence system and training a Special Forces team in the military that can defeat an enemy like those found in Iraq today.
The administration would say:
Get out of the Iraqi?
I would say:
Discover and shut down terrorist bank accounts. Discover who funds terrorism and don’t be too surprised when you find it to be a nation that acts friendly on the surface (they sell us a lot of oil) and behind our backs finance terrorists to kill us.
Uncle Sam’s response would be:
We can’t do that it would upset the international apple cart.
The blogger would immediately ask:
What international apple cart---is it the one full of oil? Are there under-the-table deals cooking that would be impacted if we would begin to tell the truth about our so called allies?
The Iraqi government is not our friend…
Remember just a few weeks ago that one single powerful general the Iraqi government appointed to finish off the war?
Have we ever heard of him again?
Was he appointed?
Did he and our new guy meet yet in Baghdad to develop a strategy?
Or did this newly appointed guy fade away?”
I go back to an earlier blog I wrote: “The Iraqi government is not our friend.” We are being strung out and they are holding on for dear life to benefit later from black gold.
Until we take some of the actions listed above, I will say to you again we are not at war with terrorism. We are playing a game and we are not serious about any of this business.”
There has been a massive amount of activity within the government and the administration over the past several weeks and it is time for a review to determine if any progress has resulted. I am going to come at the situation with some commons sense ideas—and not as a democrat or a republican.
The state of the union speech suggested that the President is holding strong to the view of sending in another 20,000 troops to quell the factional warring in Iraq. In fact, the troops are now on station. The Commander and Chief has put congress in a tough spot—even though the democrats hint that they will withhold the funding to support this effort in the long term, they probably cannot really take such action. They fear that the American public would see them in a situation of non support of the troops. This is not a good place to be politically. So the funding will probably be there and the deployment will complete and we will lose more youngsters in the civil war in Iraq.
Is it apparent that politics and political agendas come before common sense and responsible action? Why do we continually lose sight of the goal? And the goal is to quell terrorism, but how?
Iraq and Terrorism in America
Does Iraq have anything to do with terrorism penetrating our shores? Five years ago it probably had very little if anything to do with terrorism in America. What about today? With the fire we have built in the Middle East through our actions in Iraq, I am afraid that we have stoked the embers of terrorism beyond even the expectation of the terrorist factions. The entire region could blow up leading to major issues and we may have caused such conditions to develop and exist through our irresponsible action by invading Iraq.
I have decided that I am going to stop complaining about the situation. I am simply going to state some ideas that I have offered before and that still seem legitimate to me.
Let us get to the bottom of this situation…
The situation in Iraq finds us caught in the midst of a civil war. It is true that some of the combatants are criminals and thugs but essentially it is Sunnis and Shiites battling each other for control.
Let us get to the bottom of this situation by asking---what is it that they are trying to control? Could it be that the warring factions are vying for position to take control of a “new government” beyond the one in place? Could it be that such control would allow the nationalization of the oil industry and the faction in power would benefit from the oil production? It makes common sense to me and so I am going to adopt the idea.
By inaction the government has marginalized every Iraqi citizen…
In an earlier writing I suggested that the Alaska model be imposed in Iraq---which means get the oil industry moving and pay every citizen a stipend from the oil revenues. But the current government either cannot or will not turn this solution to action. By inaction the government has marginalized every Iraqi citizen and said to them “no oil money for you.”
So what is likely to occur? Someone will rise to the top of the heap, and I have very little confidence that it will be the government currently in power---because I don’t believe they are in power at all. They show very little leadership and no solutions to existing problems. They have rigor mortis.
I believe that President Malaki and his colleagues are waiting for the “other shoe to drop.” The other shoe being “who will be the last man standing.” Once that is sorted out and a strong man is identified, they (Malaki and his people) will join with the victorious rebellious leader. But there is a danger in this scenario for the current government---the strongman may take out Malaki and his regime. In any case, once the real leader emerges and takes power the game will begin.
What is the game?
Oil is the game!
Oil will flow from the wells and cash will flow and the government in place will benefit and the common man will miss out on the entire show. It will be back to normal in Iraq and all of our attempts at rescuing this country and bringing democracy to it will fail. Why? The Iraqi’s are not culturally ready for democracy and all of its complex machinations. They don’t have the foggiest notion as to what it means, can’t get their arms around it, democracy is not culturally in tune with life in Iraq--plain and simple--it is a square peg in a round hole.
Why did the modern day whiz kids not see this coming—the big thinkers in Defense and State and the White House? They didn’t want to see it because their arrogance and righteousness caused them to believe that everyone loves the “American model” and that includes the Iraqis.
“Too pushy”
I recently traveled by cab from O’Hare airport to downtown Chicago and the taxi driver was from Jordon. He was a very articulate man and had earned a master’s degree from a prominent American University. He came off as a very bright man and he had an opinion about us Americans.
He simply said America is “Too pushy.” He said, “We Jordanians love the King of Jordon---we have loved him and his predecessors for many, many years. We don’t need democracy; we simply need a strong, just King.”
Sounds like the 1960s and Vietnam…
My call to the administration is---come home America they don’t want our help. Come home America and let us begin to solve our own problems. The administration’s answer to that is if we retreat from the Middle East we might find ourselves fighting terrorism at home. Sounds like the 1960s and Vietnam. The US Government and its whiz kids of that era had the fixation that if we abandoned Vietnam everything would come unglued. They insisted that if we left South East Asia that Cambodia, Laos, Thailand maybe even Indonesia would go communist.
Did it happen? No.
We are giving too much power and too much expertise to the international terrorists. They are simply not as good as we make them out to be. But, there is another problem and let me remind you folks in the administration that we already have terrorism at home. It is going on all around us primarily in our population centers. It is the gang phenomenon where gangs terrorize neighborhoods, fight for turf and the control of drug distribution systems. This form of terrorism is as bad as that found in troubled sectors of Baghdad. But the administration would prefer to fix Iraq rather than fix New York City, Los Angeles and Chicago.
The blogger and Uncle Sam
Let’s play a game for a moment and generate some questions and answers between the blogger and Uncle Sam.
First the blog writer:
How would the administration respond to the idea of it attacking and destroying terrorism in our streets idea?
The administration would say:
You don’t understand Mr. Blog Writer---we are talking about international 9-11 style terrorism.
I would say:
Come home and fight international terrorism from our shores through political, diplomatic, economic actions as well as vastly improved intelligence efforts.
Spend the next 94 billion dollars on re-building a worldwide human intelligence system and training a Special Forces team in the military that can defeat an enemy like those found in Iraq today.
The administration would say:
Get out of the Iraqi?
I would say:
Discover and shut down terrorist bank accounts. Discover who funds terrorism and don’t be too surprised when you find it to be a nation that acts friendly on the surface (they sell us a lot of oil) and behind our backs finance terrorists to kill us.
Uncle Sam’s response would be:
We can’t do that it would upset the international apple cart.
The blogger would immediately ask:
What international apple cart---is it the one full of oil? Are there under-the-table deals cooking that would be impacted if we would begin to tell the truth about our so called allies?
The Iraqi government is not our friend…
Remember just a few weeks ago that one single powerful general the Iraqi government appointed to finish off the war?
Have we ever heard of him again?
Was he appointed?
Did he and our new guy meet yet in Baghdad to develop a strategy?
Or did this newly appointed guy fade away?”
I go back to an earlier blog I wrote: “The Iraqi government is not our friend.” We are being strung out and they are holding on for dear life to benefit later from black gold.
Until we take some of the actions listed above, I will say to you again we are not at war with terrorism. We are playing a game and we are not serious about any of this business.”
We need to try common sense and see where it takes us.
