Why I'm an Independent (Part 1 in my new 536 part series)

The New York Times recently printed information taken from the classified National Intelligence Estimate which states that the Iraq war has “helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.” (Article can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?hp&ex=1159070400&en=003f596f66422cfd&ei=5094&partner=homepage.) This document, which is the result of 16 different intelligence services within the government and which is the first of its kind since the invasion of Iraq, has now spread across all manner of media outlets. In short, the report states that “the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” according to one intelligence official.

 

On the one hand, it pains me to hear that this would be news to anyone. We invaded two predominantly Muslim countries within two years, the situation of the Palestinians has all but fallen on deaf ears, etc. However, as the NYTimes reminds its readers, this estimate flies in the face of pretty much everything that the administration has stated regarding the Iraq war and the overall war on terror. Not only is Iraq the central front in the war on terror, we are winning that war.

 

Are we though? Permit me a quick digression: on September 11 of this year, Mr Bush gave a prime time address wherein he stated that we are in “a struggle for civilization” itself. Further, he stated that this war “is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21^st century and the calling of our generation… The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad.” (Full text at CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/11/bush.transcript/index.html.) As Jon Stewart of the Daily Show noted soon after this address, this is a choice insult of our intelligence as citizens. Put simply, if that is the case, why do we only have 130,000 + troops in Iraq? Indeed, why don’t we have forced conscription? Why aren’t we ALL there? If civilization is at risk, why don’t we do some simply means/ends mathematics and nuke the entire nation? A few million lives lost for the sake of civilization itself? We made that decision before rather easily with Hiroshima and Dresden, no? So, either Mr Bush is completely stupid, or he does not in any way intend his highfalutin rhetoric.

 

(Incidentally, “highfalutin” has not been picked up by my spell-checker. Is the OED starting to incorporate the redneck terminology of my native South?)

 

On the other hand, the Democrats failed to provide anything intelligent (to my knowledge) in response. In their continual attempt to prove themselves the opposition party according to the two most wretched strategies in history (saying whatever the administration claims is wrong and doing whatever they think will win them votes, regardless of intelligence or consequences), they have proclaimed that the document is proof the administration has followed a “failed strategy” in Iraq. As for an alternative, I haven’t heard much. Either they deflect the question with their own brand of hollow rhetoric: “This administration is trying to change the subject. I don’t think voters are going to buy that” (Re. Jane Harman, ). “It is abundantly clear that we need a new direction in Iraq by strategically redeploying our troops to fight and win the real war on terror and make our country safer… It’s only the Republican leaders who have their heads in the sand [!!!], stubbornly refusing to change course and making the war on terror harder to win” (Senator Edward Kennedy, D-Mass). And, the most common line: “It’s time for a new direction in this country” (Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill).

 

I’m all for the Democrats finding a unified voice, which can be condensed into a phrase that the country can simultaneously understand and remember. Yet if in the process they seem to be devolving into an entity even more depraved than that which they decry. They are doing well emulating the current regime in their shameless attempt to obtain power, regardless of the means. Nevertheless, they can’t take the next step: attempting to force their philosophy at home and abroad without any strategy for achieving it. That is, the Democrats don’t seem to have a philosophy, save “We are not them.” At least the Neocons had the Contract for the New American Century (however insane that may be) and the invasion of Iraq (however little they considered it). As far as I can tell, the Democrats’ response seems to be (VERY loosely) to withdraw troops as soon as possible.

 

John Negroponte, national intelligence director, provided some sanity in all this tripe: “The conclusions of the intelligence community are designed to be comprehensive and viewing them through the narrow prism of a fraction of judgments distorts the broad framework they create.” (Compare that to Mr Bush’s delightful quip: “America is safer… but it is not yet safe.” Gee, maybe this is why those in Washington so rarely talk straight. Whenever they try it, they look so colossally transparent that, should it become habit, the stock market would plunge and all our enemies would be so emboldened as to instantly attack.) This is undoubtedly true: regardless of what the rest of the NIE document contains, it is sheer folly to make assumptions based on fragments leaked to the press by those who have their own agendas. Likewise, Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA): “I think there is a much more fundamental issue how we respond. And that is what we do with the Iraq war itself. That’s the focal point for inspiring more radical Islam fundamentalism, and that’s a problem that nobody seems to have an answer to” (CNN’s Late Edition).

 

As much as I like Mr Specter, I don’t think he has been paying attention lately. Many, many folks—Middle Eastern experts of all stripes, media specialists, policy and intelligence personnel, etc.—agree that there is a very, very simple answer to the problem: make them love us. Make Iraq and Afghanistan the best places to live this side of Eden. Meanwhile, regain the moral higher ground. Admittedly, these “answers” are simple in the saying; no one has quite figured out how to do them at present. But what amazes me is how incredibly obtuse those in charge of both parties would have to be to not recognize some immediate steps that could lead toward these ends. Instead, we have one group trying to scare the hell out of us (amazing how we are suddenly hearing the name of bin Laden again) while the other is trying to promise us new leadership and an end to war (as if we can merely give the Iraqis a date whereby we will disappear, after destroying their entire country)…

 

Every semester, I try and make my students vote by giving them extra credit. Regardless of whether I am teaching philosophy of law of Asian philosophy, I show them how it is infinitely relevant to that which we are studying. I tell them about people in other countries who make this a day of celebration, who become elated at the prospect. I try to make them ashamed of their own apathetic dereliction of such an august duty.

 

Times like these, I find it hard to blame those who choose apathy.

 

-W.