Welcome to the philosophical and spiritual musings of...
Blogging Dating Politics Relationships Personal Development Spirituality
 

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

The fantasies of noble values

Over here I read an interesting piece on America's involvement in Iraq. There were a number of comments which sounded great, but inspired me to write the following as a comment to their post:

You ignore the facts that Iraq was the friend of America, the barrier against Iran, until such time as it suited them to end that relationship. Everything Saddam did was done with US assistance, approval or inaction - which is an unspoken approval in itself.

You also ignore the facts that it's the US taxpayers who are paying for the war. It's the taxpayers' money that is going to those American companies commissioned to rebuild Iraq, including the oil supply. These companies are receiving money from the government to go in and rebuild Iraq. These companies are then free to make a profit from their efforts, not just in the financial return of what they are building, but in the profits gained from government contracts. There is little cost to these companies, but massive financial gain. And who is paying for it? The taxpayers.

It just might be about the oil, considering that the profits are far outwheighing any costs, especially since the US taxpayers are footing the bill. Are they getting any return on the money they're spending? Hell no. All they're getting is more financial burden as their money is reduced by rising costs due to the war they're funding. Money is being made as a result of this, and it's going to the friends of the Bush administration, which will, in return, come back to them when they're out of politics. The good of the country has less value to them than the good of their pockets once they're no longer in political leadership.

War in Iraq has never been about high ideals or noble values. That's the spin they're telling you. If they truly believed in high ideals and noble values, and in acting upon them, they would have stepped in a long time ago, when Saddam was committing atrocities against Iraqis in the 80's and 90's.

Your comments only help with the Bush administration's 'spin', but it doesn't reflect on historical precedent - which is that no action was taken until such action was financially profitable to certain people and companies. It's all about profit, not ideals.

Your words are pretty, but they ignore reality in a big way. Lofty ideals don't measure up to the facts of what could have happened and didn't, and what is happening that shouldn't.

Taking 'historical precedent' back to WWII is not relevent to the situation today. There were no 'friends of the President' setting up companies within Axis nations during the war, to rebuild those countries and take advantage of profits at the expense of innocent deaths. There WAS a higher ideal at play, and the people and companies were all on one side.

There is no unity today because people can see the truth, no matter what the Bush administration, the media or those people like yourself who are aligned with them, says. Noble values are spoken, but not carried out. Actions are speaking far louder than words, and the actions of those within the Bush administration and its supporters, within the US and in other countries, show they're more interested in personal and corporate profit than they are in liberating innocent people from oppression. There's nothing you can say that will prove otherwise, as the expression of noble values has no significance in the face of cold, hard reality.
It saddens me to see people ignoring evidence in favour of high ideals and noble values. They claim that everyone should support the war against Iraq because it serves a higher purpose, and they claim that a lack of unity on this issue will bring about failure. I agree completely to the latter, but not the former.

If the US leadership was serious about the noble values that they claim to have, then there wouldn't be evidence of 'cronyism', where political and financial favouritism is handed out to their friends. If there was no evidence of duplicity from the US government then there wouldn't be this problem. If the government was actually acting in the best interests of the Iraqis, they would have the support from all of the American people and even the rest of the world.

Unfortunately, American and global disharmony is a result of disharmonious actions.


Categories:

Posted on 9/20/2005 10:07:00 AM Backlinks


If you have found value in what Alan (the author) has given you, please leave a donation for him so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

4 Comments:

Blogger Chancelucky said...

iirc, the US may have had many motives for entering WW2, but the immediate cause was clear enough, there was a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese.

Going to Iraq after 9/11 is the equivalent of the US declaring war on Argentina after Pearl Harbor.

9/20/2005 10:24:00 AM  
Blogger Alan Howard said...

You're right, of course. I always felt it didn't make sense that if Saudi Arabian terrorists (who were using false ID identifying themselves as Saudi Arabians, so their true nationality was actually unknown) attacked WTC, and it was organised by a Saudi Arabian (bin Laden) that it meant they had to attack Afghanistan to find him. And when they didn't find bin Laden there, they conveniently forgot him and attacked Iraq. The reasons changed so many times, no one knows any more which reason they're using today to justify their attacks, or to stay in Iraq. It's just ludicrous.

9/20/2005 10:51:00 AM  
Anonymous Moghal said...

I don't have any of the information to hand at the moment (I'm at work) but there is, I recall, a substantial amount of evidence to suggest that Pearl Harbour wasn't really any sort of surprise at all.

I've not looked into it deeply, myself, but I've seen fairly solid looking reports once or twice in the past.

9/20/2005 08:19:00 PM  
Blogger Alan Howard said...

Yes, I've read about it myself. The US shut off the oil supply to Japan, and as a result, forced them to act. While the US was saying it was to encourage the Japanese to stop fighting, it was really the means by which the US could get drawn into the war, which was their ultimate aim.

9/23/2005 03:51:00 PM  

Post a Comment


(C) Alan Howard 1998 - 2006