Seeing Things in a Different Light __ Current Wars, Middle East, Future War

Current Wars

What have we accomplished in Afghanistan and in Iraq? Was it worth it?

We had a right and a duty to go to war in Afghanistan against the Taliban and their friends, al Qaeda. It was a noble cause. But we have been there 10 years.

I have long-held a theory about guerrilla war. They never end. They go on and on until one side decides to quit. We could have declared victory after two years and brought troops home. But we didn’t. We are still there. It has been announced that we will have all of our troops out of Afghanistan by sometime in 2014. We are going to negotiate with the Taliban. It seems clear that when we leave the Taliban will come back in force and will be supported by our “ally” Pakistan. A lot of precious blood and a lot of treasure has been lost  as we continued the war. I ask again: Was it worth it?  What did we accomplish. Have we stabilized the region? Do we now have strong allies in the region?

Did we have a right and a duty to go to war in Iraq? That is certainly debatable. We destroyed Saddam Hussein’s military in short order, We later captured Saddam and he was tried and executed. Did we then declare victory and bring our troops home? No, we stayed on for many more years to do some “nation building”. And, how has that worked out now that our troops have finally come home? The way I see it one of two things will happen in Iraq. There will either be a long drawn out civil war or the current regime will consolidate power and there will be another Saddam Hussein type government only this time it will be allied with Iran. So, was this war worth the blood and treasure spent? Did we accomplish anything of value?

Middle East

WHAT THE HELL have we done? There should be no doubt in anybody’s mind that our State Department was behind what is now called the “Arab Spring”.  We were led to believe that this would bring democracy to the long suffer people of the region. No one who was paying attention believed that. We all predicted exactly what was going to happen. Radical Muslim would come to power and there would be chaos in the region. Does anyone believe our State Department and our intelligence agencies didn’t know exactly what would happen? Of course they knew. So why did they do it? So far the only tangible result has been higher oil prices. Who would want higher oil prices? Think about it. And in Lybia we couldn’t let things follow their natural course. With the urging of the UN, we and NATO had to intercede. Remember the ” Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) policy? Apparently that policy only applied to Lybia. It clearly doesn’t apply to Syria. Why? Well, Syria has a powerful ally. Russia. So, the entire Middle East has been allowed, if not encouraged, to destabilize. Some of us tin-hatters predicted over a year ago that this was a prelude to war in the Middle East. Will Iran provide the needed excuse?

Future War

A nuclear Iran is unacceptable. So says the United States, Europe, Israel and, many of Iran’s Arab neighbors. All of the talking heads in the Obama administration hinting that war is inevitable. Republican presidential candidates Romney, Gingrich and, Santorum have indicated that they won’t tolerate a nuclear Iran. Many European heads of state have said the same  So is war with Iran envitable? I  must admit that the idea of a nuclear Iran scares the hell out of me. But let’s think about the consequences of such a war.

Nobody is talking about the consequences of going to war with Iran. Taking out Iran’s capacity to produce nuclear warheads will not be easy. Whether the attack is led by Israel or is led by the US, doesn’t matter. I ran is a big country. Their nuclear facilities are deep under ground. And, Iran has the capacity to fight back with their missiles. How can we confirm that we have really destroyed all of their nuclear capacity without putting boots on the ground? If we have to put boots on the ground, we are talking about a long drawn out war. There will be disruption to the flow of oil out of the Middle East and oil prices will raise: hurting the already fragile economies of Europe and the US.

As bad as the above described war with Iran would be, it could get a whole lot worse. The above described war assumes that China and Russia would sit on the sidelines. Do you believe that? Why is no one talking about the possibility that China and Russia might join the war on the side of Iran. I believe it is a real possibility. And now we are talking about World War III. There is nothing good that could come from such a war. Nothing! The world’s banksters might be happy but, no  one else would be.

As I said earlier, the idea of a nuclear Iran scares the hell out of me. But folks, we really need to think real hard about whether or not we could live with a nuclear Iran. Stopping them from going nuclear could have devastating consequences.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Categories: Uncategorized

25 thoughts on “Seeing Things in a Different Light __ Current Wars, Middle East, Future War

  1. Very good points and spot on on all of them Jim. You are so right that we should have come home from Afghanistan sooner and that we should not have got into Iraq. We should never have gotten involved in Libya and it is crazy how we are stirring the pot in Egypt, Yemen and everywhere else in North Africa and the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood is not our friend. The Presidents considering releasing Taliban prisoners in Gitmo, is a disgrace, but then IMHO the President is a disgrace all by himself.
    But what you didn’t really mention was Syria and Israel, and I think that is the flashpoint. If Libya falls, Israel will be totally surrounded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood that would like nothing better that to erase her from the history books. We have troops in Israel now, but even the government of Israel doesn’t trust this administration. I am sure that if they decide to attack Iran, they will only let us know at the last minute. I personally believe that this President would tell Iran, directly or indirectly, of Israel’s plans.
    If we help Israel, we risk involving Russia and China, who have already stated they will support Iran.
    It seems that Obama would rather bring about a world war than he would lead the world in a peaceful way. Of course these are all just my opinions, but I honestly believe that if he remains in power, we will be involved in a world war in less than two years. And the very fact that he has almost bankrupted us, and decreased our security, leaves us more at risk than ever. The outcome would not necessarily be in our favor.

  2. Many fail to realize in many parts of the world, war has been going on for centuries. It is a natural state of affairs until some form of Dictatorship develops, and forces the factions into a relative peace. Brutal they are frequently, the other option is total chaos. They are in no position for a Government as ours. We think 10 years is a long war. It is really nothing in comparison to centuries of war in certain parts of the world.

    1. Right on, Kurt!

      BTW, I have been visiting your blog but I’m not able to post comments. The same thing is happening at AOWs. The word verification test keeps rejecting me and I have triple check what I am entering. If you have any suggestions, I would appreciate hearing them.

  3. Jefferson called the old world “nations of eternal war” and advocated neutrality in war and equality in trade. Didn’t take them too long to buy that principle off.

    I totally agree with the points made on Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Most people don’t realize how really big Iran is and it baffles me why the chickenhawks act like those humongous countries of China and Russia don’t even exist. If you start something in Iran, you just strengthen the Mullahs position. In times of war, the people in charge get more power, not less. Right now, the Mullahs are not so popular, but with a war, they will solidify their position. Read Foreign Affairs, the CFR mag to know what the Elites are planning to do. They seem divided. One thing is for sure, war makes a lot of people a lot of money.

  4. Glad to see you back Jim. Excellent piece.

    I am gonna Ron Paul everyone here. If you think the United States has the capacity and where with all to control every nation in the world…who gets nukes and who doesn’t…you are all nuttier than I am.

    We have so many dire problems. Policing a bankrupt world with a bankrupt country. How long can that last?

  5. The potential is certainly there for a horrible war involving all of the Middle East, Russia, China, the US, Europe –and let’s not forget Iran’s little friends just South of us, which according to some reports have missiles capable of hitting our Southern borders.
    Was Iraq worth it? It pains me to say “No.” Not the lives, not the money. We should never be in the business of “spreading democracy.” Where is that in our constitution? .

  6. A surgical strike to take out the nuclear capabilities of Iran will be better than to confront an Iran with a nuclear weapon. No question about that.
    I don’t buy the Russian bluff.

    The only other option is to elect Ron “Iran Means Well” Paul and I’m sure he can sweet talk the Iranians into a love relationship with Israel.

  7. I highly recommend Mark Steyn’s latest column in National Review. Yes, we need to reevaluate our way of war, particularly considering that we have no will to prosecute it, but no, nobody has solutions, certainly not Ron Paul.

  8. The war on terror makes no sense, until you realize it is about China. Afghanistan is about controlling Central Asia, and the source of most of China’s water. Iraq is about controlling the gulf and being able to cut off oil and gas from Iran. Africa is about cutting China off from the raw materials they need to fight a prolonged war. We are moving our pieces into place for a larger conflict, and it’s stupid.

  9. Does the US–and the rest of the world, for that matter–want to live forever in fear of what Iran will do, or be forever subject to blackmail by the religious zealots living there? If the answer to these two questions is no, then Iran must be stopped from getting nuclear weapons. How this is to be accomplished is another matter entirely, but it could be said that if Carter and Reagan had taken a harder line against Iran back in the day, we would not be in this position now. Which brings up Iraq and Afghanistan. What would have been the position of the US in 20 years time if these countries had not been invaded? Hard to tell, but the rationale for going to war was there, even if it was not always stated clearly. Yes, it is messy and difficult to deal with such situations, but what in life is easy?

    1. I don’t believe that we are talking about a short term action to take out Iran’s nuclear capability: I think we are talking about a long drawn out war that could involve China and Russia. So, before I give my grandsons a big hug and tell them how proud I am of them for going off to make the world a safer place, I want the President and the Pentagon to come before Congress and convince to declare this war as the constitution requires. Is that asking too much?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s