[BretLudwig]

What the Iraq War is About

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

"The Bush Regime has quagmired America into a sixth year of war in
Afghanistan and Iraq with no end in sight. The cost of these wars of
aggression is horrendous. Official US combat casualties stand at 4,538
dead. Officially, 29,780 US troops have been wounded in Iraq. Experts
have argued that these numbers are understatements. Regardless, these
numbers are only the tip of the iceberg.

On April 17, 2008, AP News reported that a new study released by the RAND
Corporation concludes that €œsome 300,000 U.S. troops are suffering from
major depression or post traumatic stress from serving in the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and 320,000 received brain injuries.€�

On April 21, 2008, OpEdNews reported that an internal email from Gen.
Michael J. Kussman, undersecretary for health at the Veterans
Administration, to Ira Katz, head of mental health at the VA, confirms a
McClatchy Newspaper report that 126 veterans per week commit suicide. To
the extent that the suicides are attributable to the war, more than 500
deaths should be added to the reported combat fatalities each month.

Turning to Iraqi deaths, expert studies support as many as 1.2 million
dead Iraqis, almost entirely civilians. Another 2 million Iraqis have
fled their country, and there are 2 million displaced Iraqis within Iraq.


Afghan casualties are unknown.

Both Afghanistan and Iraq have suffered unconscionable civilian deaths and
damage to housing, infrastructure and environment. Iraq is afflicted with
depleted uranium and open sewers.

Then there are the economic costs to the US. Nobel economist Joseph
Stiglitz estimates the full cost of the invasion and attempted occupation
of Iraq to be between $3 trillion and $5 trillion. The dollar price of
oil and gasoline have tripled, and the dollar has lost value against other
currencies, declining dramatically even against the lowly Thai baht. Before
Bush launched his wars of aggression, one US dollar was worth 45 baht.
Today the dollar is only worth 30 baht.

The US cannot afford these costs. Prior to his resignation last month, US
Comptroller General David Walker reported that the accumulated unfunded
liabilities of the US government total $53 trillion dollars. The US
government cannot cover these liabilities. The Bush Regime even has to
borrow the money from foreigners to pay for its wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. There is no more certain way to bankrupt the country and
dethrone the dollar as world reserve currency.

The moral costs are perhaps the highest. All of the deaths, injuries, and
economic costs to the US and its victims are due entirely to lies told by
the President and Vice President of the US, by the Secretary of Defense,
the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, and, of course, by
the media, including the €œliberal€� New York Times. All of these lies
were uttered in behalf of an undeclared agenda. €œOur€� government has
still not told €œwe the people€� the real reasons €œour€� government
invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.
Instead, the American sheeple have accepted a succession of transparent
lies: weapons of mass destruction, al Qaeda connections and complicity in
the 9/11 attack, overthrowing a dictator and €œbringing democracy€� to
Iraqis.

The great moral American people would rather believe government lies than
to acknowledge the governments crimes and to hold the government
accountable.

There are many effective ways in which a moral people could protest.
Consider investors, for example. Clearly Halliburton and military
suppliers are cleaning up. Investors flock to the stocks in order to
participate in the rise in value from booming profits. But what would a
moral people do? Wouldnt they boycott the stocks of the companies that
are profiting from the Bush Regimes war crimes?

If the US invaded Iraq for any of the succession of reasons the Bush
Regime has given, why would the US have spent $750 million on a fortress
€œembassy€� with anti-missile systems and its own electricity and water
systems spread over 104 acres? No one has ever seen or heard of such an
embassy before. Clearly, this €œembassy€� is constructed as the
headquarters of an occupying colonial ruler.

The fact is that Bush invaded Iraq with the intent of turning Iraq into an
American colony. The so-called government of al-Maliki is not a government.
Maliki is the well paid front man for US colonial rule. Malikis
government does not exist outside the protected Green Zone, the
headquarters of the American occupation.

If colonial rule were not the intent, the US would not be going out of its
way to force al Sadrs 60,000 man militia into a fight. Sadr is a
Shiite who is a real Iraqi leader, perhaps the only Iraqi who could end
the sectarian conflict and restore some unity to Iraq. As such he is
regarded by the Bush Regime as a danger to the American puppet Maliki.
Unless the US is able to purchase or rig the upcoming Iraqi election, Sadr
is likely to emerge as the dominant figure. This would be a highly
unfavorable development for the Bush Regimes hopes of establishing its
colonial rule behind the facade of a Maliki fake democracy. Rather than
work with Sadr in order to extract themselves from a quagmire, the
Americans will be doing everything possible to assassinate Sadr.

Why does the Bush Regime want to rule Iraq? Some speculate that it is a
matter of €œpeak oil.€� Oil supplies are said to be declining even as
demand for oil multiplies from developing countries such as China.
According to this argument, the US decided to seize Iraq to insure its own
oil supply.

This explanation is problematic. Most US oil comes from Canada, Mexico,
and Venezuela. The best way for the US to insure its oil supplies would be
to protect the dollars role as world reserve currency. Moreover, $3-5
trillion would have purchased a tremendous amount of oil. Prior to the US
invasions, the US oil import bill was running less than $100 billion per
year. Even in 2006 total US imports from OPEC countries was $145 billion,
and the US trade deficit with OPEC totaled $106 billion. Three trillion
dollars could have paid for US oil imports for 30 years; five trillion
dollars could pay the US oil bill for a half century had the Bush Regime
preserved a sound dollar.

The more likely explanation for the US invasion of Iraq is the
neoconservative Bush Regimes commitment to the defense of Israeli
territorial expansion. There is no such thing as a neoconservative who is
not allied with Israel. Israel hopes to steal all of the West Bank and
southern Lebanon for its territorial expansion. An American colonial
regime in Iraq not only buttresses Israel from attack, but also can
pressure Syria and Iran from giving support to the Palestinians and
Lebanese. The Iraqi war is a war for Israeli territorial expansion.
Americans are dying and bleeding to death financially for Israel.
Bushs €œwar on terror€� is a hoax that serves to cover US
intervention in the Middle East in behalf of €œgreater Israel.€�




--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html