Big
News: The War Failed
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
DIGG THIS
There's
an episode of "I Dream of Jeannie" from years ago when Jeannie blinks
into existence tomorrow's newspaper. Everyone is amazed and riveted
by the implications of knowing tomorrow's headlines today. Many
possibilities here!
In the case of the war on terror, we could have known tomorrow's
headlines five years ago. In particular, this headline, which is
supposed to be shocking and apparently has people in Washington
going nuts, seemed positively ho hum: "Spy Agencies Say Iraq War
Worsens Terrorism Threat: U.S. Intelligence Assessment Is Said to
Find a Rise in Global Islamic Radicalism."
Just so that we are clear on this, we should be reminded that the
stated policy of the Bush administration, just before bombing Iraq's
cities and overthrowing its Sunni government, was to bring freedom,
democracy, and pluralistic happiness to the country.
Five years later, the puppet government in Baghdad is still in
a bunker, tanks patrol streets, there are curfews and speech controls,
major parts of the country have effectively seceded, the water is
dirty and disease ridden, electricity is still off, migration out
increases exponentially, tribal war is routine, American soldiers'
heads are blown off if they so much as poke them out of the foxhole,
and religious and ethnic hatreds grow.
We keep hearing that Iraq is "on the brink" of civil war, but how
will we know when we move from brink to reality? The Sunnis hate
the ruling Shiites, the Kurds hate them both, and everyone hates
the Christians and Jews. It's all about a struggle for power: who
gets to twist the thumbscrews, and whose thumbs are screwed. If
this is the brink, the reality will be unbearable.
Can you imagine that anyone in the US believed that the answer
to these problems was to put George Bush in charge?
But it was indeed Bush's idea that he would quell Islamic radicalism
by smashing the world that the relative moderates had created, and
acting precisely as the fundamentalists always claimed he would
act. It's as if the fundies themselves had written the script, and
George played the leading role in a play they were directing.
Hence, even by the Bush administration's own standards, the war
on terror has increased the problem rather than diminished it.
Students of government can hardly be surprised that a government
program ends up creating the very opposite of what it purported
to accomplish. Welfare increases poverty, the minimum wage boosts
unemployment, prohibition promotes the banned behavior, and, just
as we would expect once we understand the logic, the war on terror
has created and encouraged the rise of more terrorism and the ideology
that backs it.
We hardly need a National Intelligence Estimate to demonstrate
it to us. What this intelligence estimate really shows is that the
reality has become too obvious for even the government to deny.
The report cites gobs of secret data that can't be divulged to the
public. Oh sure. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of the effects
of all government policy, along with a bit of understanding of human
nature, would have predicted this very thing.
After all, Iraq was never a hotbed of terror. The Bush administration
just pretended that it was because Bush wanted to get Saddam. It
wasn't even a campaign theme. But it was first on the agenda when
he came into office. 9-11 helped by whipping up the public for war,
even though there was no relationship between 9-11 and Iraq. But
it does appear that Bush got more than he bargained for. He can't
win this war, no matter how many Americans and Iraqis he sends to
their deaths.
But who precisely benefits in the end? Fundamentalists, to be sure,
but also the federal government, which gets more power and control.
There is also a critical financial factor. The tens of billions
that have been shoveled out by the public sector to the private
sector in this war have gone mainly to Bush-connected corporations
and elites. They are the ones who have benefited from the "privatization"
of the war, in the name of efficiency.
But
what is really puzzling here is the intellectual failure of the
conservatives and libertarians who have cheered for this war from
the beginning. Why do these people, who otherwise understand the
failure of government in all aspects of domestic politics, believe
that the government has a Midas touch in dealing with foreign affairs?
Here we have a serious and dramatic example of cognitive dissonance.
It's as if a person who is terrified of drinking poison in the
morning mistakes it for an aperitif in the evening.
What
a poor example these people set for the left! If conservatives and
libertarians are not willing to apply their anti-government logic
consistently against war, how can they be surprised that the left
is not willing to apply its antiwar logic domestically? Combine
the two schools of inconsistency and you have the makings of the
ever-growing welfare-warfare state.
So you want to know the future? It's not as hard as it seems. Expect
every government program to fail to achieve its stated aims – domestic
and foreign – and you will hit the mark every time.
September
25, 2006
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com,
and author of Speaking
of Liberty.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|