| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Defendario" |
| Date: |
14 Mar 2006 10:15:39 PM |
| Object: |
Lessons of Iraq War Start With US History |
by Howard Zinn
On the third anniversary of President Bush's Iraq debacle, it's
important to consider why the administration so easily fooled so many
people into supporting the war.
I believe there are two reasons, which go deep into our national culture.=
One is an absence of historical perspective. The other is an inability
to think outside the boundaries of nationalism.
If we don't know history, then we are ready meat for carnivorous
politicians and the intellectuals and journalists who supply the carving
knives. But if we know some history, if we know how many times
presidents have lied to us, we will not be fooled again.
President Polk lied to the nation about the reason for going to war with
Mexico in 1846. It wasn't that Mexico "shed American blood upon the
American soil" but that Polk, and the slave-owning aristocracy, coveted
half of Mexico.
President McKinley lied in 1898 about the reason for invading Cuba,
saying we wanted to liberate the Cubans from Spanish control, but the
truth is that he really wanted Spain out of Cuba so that the island
could be open to United Fruit and other American corporations. He also
lied about the reasons for our war in the Philippines, claiming we only
wanted to "civilize" the Filipinos, while the real reason was to own a
valuable piece of real estate in the far Pacific, even if we had to kill
hundreds of thousands of Filipinos to accomplish that.
President Wilson lied about the reasons for entering the First World
War, saying it was a war to "make the world safe for democracy," when it
was really a war to make the world safe for the rising American power.
President Truman lied when he said the atomic bomb was dropped on
Hiroshima because it was "a military target."
And everyone lied about Vietnam -- President Kennedy about the extent of
our involvement, President Johnson about the Gulf of Tonkin and
President Nixon about the secret bombing of Cambodia. They all claimed
the war was to keep South Vietnam free of communism, but really wanted
to keep South Vietnam as an American outpost at the edge of the Asian
continent.
President Reagan lied about the invasion of Grenada, claiming falsely
that it was a threat to the United States.
The elder Bush lied about the invasion of Panama, leading to the death
of thousands of ordinary citizens in that country. And he lied again
about the reason for attacking Iraq in 1991 -- hardly to defend the
integrity of Kuwait, rather to assert U.S. power in the oil-rich Middle
East.
There is an even bigger lie: the arrogant idea that this country is the
center of the universe, exceptionally virtuous, admirable, superior.
If our starting point for evaluating the world around us is the firm
belief that this nation is somehow endowed by Providence with unique
qualities that make it morally superior to every other nation on Earth,
then we are not likely to question the president when he says we are
sending our troops here or there, or bombing this or that, in order to
spread our values -- democracy, liberty, and let's not forget free
enterprise -- to some God-forsaken (literally) place in the world.
But we must face some facts that disturb the idea of a uniquely virtuous
nation.
We must face our long history of ethnic cleansing, in which the U.S.
government drove millions of Indians off their land by means of
massacres and forced evacuations.
We must face our long history, still not behind us, of slavery,
segregation and racism.
And we must face the lingering memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
It is not a history of which we can be proud.
Our leaders have taken it for granted, and planted the belief in the
minds of many people that we are entitled, because of our moral
superiority, to dominate the world. Both the Republican and Democratic
Parties have embraced this notion.
But what is the idea of our moral superiority based on?
A more honest estimate of ourselves as a nation would prepare us all for
the next barrage of lies that will accompany the next proposal to
inflict our power on some other part of the world.
It might also inspire us to create a different history for ourselves, by
taking our country away from the liars who govern it, and by rejecting
nationalist arrogance, so that we can join people around the world in
the common cause of peace and justice.
Howard Zinn, who served as a bombardier in the Air Force in World War
II, is the author of "A People's History of the United States"
(HarperCollins, 1995). He is also the co-author, with Anthony Arnove, of
"Voices of a People's History of the United States" (Seven Stories
Press, 2004).
=A9 2006 The Progressive
.
|
|
| User: "sleeper" |
|
| Title: Re: Lessons of Iraq War Start With US History |
14 Mar 2006 10:47:01 PM |
|
|
Defendario <Defendario@netscape.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:47piobFgm58sU2@individual.net:
The elder Bush lied about the invasion of Panama, leading to the death
of thousands of ordinary citizens in that country. And he lied again
about the reason for attacking Iraq in 1991 -- hardly to defend the
integrity of Kuwait, rather to assert U.S. power in the oil-rich Middle
East.
zinn needs to research just who the bush family is doing business with in
the middle east.
*that* is why we are in iraq.
when saddam got uppity and invaded kuwait, "the wimp" defended his business
partners with a massive invasion of iraq to establish u.s. business
hegemony over middle eastern wealth. when he likened hussein to hitler,
then failed to overthrow him, ghwb was stuck in a tough political spot. he
couldn't topple the regime (like his ignorant boy would do 12 years later)
because he knew that the sunni baathists had a stabilizing (if not
totalitarian) influence on sectarian violence in iraq. so ghwb looked like
a bit of a moron for likening hussein to hitler and letting him remain in
power. it probably cost him the '92 election.
more recently, the u.s. is probably the only thing keeping a majority of
muslims from revolting against what they see as secular meddlings with
westerners. bahrain, kuwait, qatar, dubai... all are doing healthy
business with the west. all are comparatively secular.
saudi arabia is different, however, since they are the home of the two holy
places, mecca and medina. fundamentalist muslims see saudi arabia as
something different than its rich monarch government sees it.
you'll notice that there are no longer u.s. military bases in saudi arabia.
back to current events, w hasn't thought out the implications of fucking
with iran, a fundamentalist shia state, to protect western business
interests.
but what the hell? shoot first. ask question later.
--
http://www.kexp.org
listener-powered and commercial-free.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Lessons of Iraq War Start With US History |
14 Mar 2006 11:36:18 PM |
|
|
sleeper wrote:
Defendario <Defendario@netscape.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:47piobFgm58sU2@individual.net:
The elder Bush lied about the invasion of Panama, leading to the death
of thousands of ordinary citizens in that country. And he lied again
about the reason for attacking Iraq in 1991 -- hardly to defend the
integrity of Kuwait, rather to assert U.S. power in the oil-rich Middle
East.
zinn needs to research just who the bush family is doing business with in
the middle east.
Howard Zinn has done his homework. Yours does not contradict what he said.
*that* is why we are in iraq.
I think that PNAC is why were in Iraq. Those crazy MFers are the
Trotskyites of Democratic Capitalism, and Bushler is playing Chimpoleon.
when saddam got uppity and invaded kuwait, "the wimp" defended his business
partners with a massive invasion of iraq to establish u.s. business
hegemony over middle eastern wealth. when he likened hussein to hitler,
then failed to overthrow him, ghwb was stuck in a tough political spot. he
couldn't topple the regime (like his ignorant boy would do 12 years later)
because he knew that the sunni baathists had a stabilizing (if not
totalitarian) influence on sectarian violence in iraq. so ghwb looked like
a bit of a moron for likening hussein to hitler and letting him remain in
power. it probably cost him the '92 election.
Yes. Uppity Sand ***** Saddam messed up 41's presidency. Boo Hoo.
;-)
more recently, the u.s. is probably the only thing keeping a majority of
muslims from revolting against what they see as secular meddlings with
westerners. bahrain, kuwait, qatar, dubai... all are doing healthy
business with the west. all are comparatively secular.
They live under the sword of Damocles. Let them enjoy the feasting
while it lasts...
saudi arabia is different, however, since they are the home of the two holy
places, mecca and medina. fundamentalist muslims see saudi arabia as
something different than its rich monarch government sees it.
you'll notice that there are no longer u.s. military bases in saudi arabia.
Osama demanded that the bases be removed, and the Sauds complied. Their
loyalties are divided.
back to current events, w hasn't thought out the implications of fucking
with iran, a fundamentalist shia state, to protect western business
interests.
The nutjobs are willing to make you pay any price or bear any burden to
either: 1) Make Halliburton investors rich beyond imagination, or 2)
Precipitate the Apocalypse. Rovesputin thinks it will help the 'Pugs
avoid electoral disaster in November.
but what the hell? shoot first. ask question later.
Start praying. The End is near.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
