Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 06-29-2005, 01:05 PM

interesting willravel:

i had not considered the extent to which last night's little talk might have in fact been aimed primarily at the military. this is an interesting angle to consider--i think i underestimated it because of the aesthetic preference the bush crowd seems to have for surrounding themselves with people in uniform in general, as if that is the a priori support base for their policies.

given the lunacy, the non-planning of the iraq escapade, and given that the most direct result of that--and a whole series of other rumsfeld-specific decisions regarding how the military would be deployed--it is the soldiers who obviously stand to pay directly and most severely, i would not be surprised if there were real problems relative to this occupation developing from within the military.

i have seen lots of isolated stories about crumbling support for bushpolicies within the military, but frankly have no idea of how widespread that kind of drift is, what its motors are--or even how one would go about finding out about this--whether it is tracked in any way, where the results of such tracking might be found, etc. i mean, given the nature of the military as a top-down structure owing its obedience to the commander in chief (no matter what level of nitwit that commander might be) i wonder if there is even any interest in tracking shifts in the general attitudes within the military vis-a-vis an action.

does anyone know whether data like this is either produced or available, and if so where one might find it?

a conjecture: it would seem to me that the bush squad might be realizing they have fucked up, based on dissent that is coming from all sides. consider the timing of the attempts to enlist eu assistance in the "reconstruction"--or the transition away from occupation toward actual reconstruction--it would make sense that there is significant discontent within the military over the nature and goals of this operation..and that this might be a significant factor in the decision to approach the eu.

it would seem to me that the most logical way out of this mess woudl be for the bushpeople to go, hat in hand, to the countries they blew off in 2002 and seek to internationalize the reconstruction and for the americans in general to take their leave of longterm dreams of controlling iraqi oil...which was pushed from the outset as the way this action would pay for itself.

but i doubt seriously that this administration is capable of that kind of reflection, much less this kind of action--my sense is that they are far too arrogant to be able to force themselves to submit to what they would see as humiliation.
but the consequences of not doing it would seem to be chaos in the short and longer run.
so it would seem to me that the wages of shortsighted arrogance will be many many more people killed, maimed, etc.

all this because i do not see how, at this point, the americans could possibly not find themselves cast as occupiers. which would mean that i do not see how the americans could possibly run a reconstruction that would not be undercut from the start because it would be seen as another mode of occupation.

06-29-2005, 01:05 PM	#19 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	interesting willravel: i had not considered the extent to which last night's little talk might have in fact been aimed primarily at the military. this is an interesting angle to consider--i think i underestimated it because of the aesthetic preference the bush crowd seems to have for surrounding themselves with people in uniform in general, as if that is the a priori support base for their policies. given the lunacy, the non-planning of the iraq escapade, and given that the most direct result of that--and a whole series of other rumsfeld-specific decisions regarding how the military would be deployed--it is the soldiers who obviously stand to pay directly and most severely, i would not be surprised if there were real problems relative to this occupation developing from within the military. i have seen lots of isolated stories about crumbling support for bushpolicies within the military, but frankly have no idea of how widespread that kind of drift is, what its motors are--or even how one would go about finding out about this--whether it is tracked in any way, where the results of such tracking might be found, etc. i mean, given the nature of the military as a top-down structure owing its obedience to the commander in chief (no matter what level of nitwit that commander might be) i wonder if there is even any interest in tracking shifts in the general attitudes within the military vis-a-vis an action. does anyone know whether data like this is either produced or available, and if so where one might find it? a conjecture: it would seem to me that the bush squad might be realizing they have fucked up, based on dissent that is coming from all sides. consider the timing of the attempts to enlist eu assistance in the "reconstruction"--or the transition away from occupation toward actual reconstruction--it would make sense that there is significant discontent within the military over the nature and goals of this operation..and that this might be a significant factor in the decision to approach the eu. it would seem to me that the most logical way out of this mess woudl be for the bushpeople to go, hat in hand, to the countries they blew off in 2002 and seek to internationalize the reconstruction and for the americans in general to take their leave of longterm dreams of controlling iraqi oil...which was pushed from the outset as the way this action would pay for itself. but i doubt seriously that this administration is capable of that kind of reflection, much less this kind of action--my sense is that they are far too arrogant to be able to force themselves to submit to what they would see as humiliation. but the consequences of not doing it would seem to be chaos in the short and longer run. so it would seem to me that the wages of shortsighted arrogance will be many many more people killed, maimed, etc. all this because i do not see how, at this point, the americans could possibly not find themselves cast as occupiers. which would mean that i do not see how the americans could possibly run a reconstruction that would not be undercut from the start because it would be seen as another mode of occupation. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 06-29-2005 at 01:09 PM..