Dissident Voice

March 24, 2003

The US-mislead war on Iraq has caused a change of tune among the leaders of the aggression. Bush and Rumsfeld are still trying to appear confident but their faces betray them. The war was to be quick and easy, now we hear it will be hard and long. And the main poodle, Tony Blair, looks a bit worried when he claims it is "going to plan".

"Going to plan"??? I can't remember Blair ever sayimg the Americans blowing a Toronado bomber out of the air was included in those plans. Or a mad American running amuck among his fellow warriors. Or being bogged down in the south meeting heavy resistance. Um Qasr has been declared to be "under allied control" for the umpteenth time but still the fighting goes on. Basra has been considered too difficult to take control over so it's left standing while the US-mislead forces rush towards Baghdad circumventing all potentially defended cities on the way. The rosy picture we were presented was of conscripts capitulating in the hundred-of-thousands and cheering Iraqis welcoming the "liberators” in the north and south with flowers and kisses. Of a walkover in a war with few casualties and thankful Iraqis willing to give away Saddam Hussein together with most of their oil. Instead we have soldiers of all ranks fighting determinedly with their outdated weaponry against a massively overwhelming might and Americans taken prisoners, and using the old Nazi excuse "we were only following orders" when asked why they are in Iraq. The Iraqis actually have the nerve to resist an invasion of their land. Big surprise! The picnic painted by most pundits has turned sour. The "shock and awe" seem to have hit the "coalition" more than Iraq.

The true motive for the war was quickly revealed in the first days of the war. Number one priority turned out, very unsurprisingly, to be to take control of the oil-wells. The objective seems to be successfully accomplished. All that might follow will be secondary and if the resistance is too heavy we shouldn't be surprised to see Hussein being left in peace in Baghdad, as a good pretext for future weapons testing, while the Americans can enjoy the oil, perhaps after being forced to invade Basra and Kirkuk to prove its heroism and secure more strategic bases for the future assaults on Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Sure, a bit of "friendly damage" is to be expected such as shooting down a few of their own aircraft or bombing the wrong areas. Even prisoners and casualties are to be expected. We know it has happened and will happen again. But why didn't Bush, Rumsfeld and Blair mention such things when manipulating their people to back them? Have they not understood that “[T]he best laid plans of mice and men gang aft aglay...,"* as Robert Burns noted a long time ago? Did they seriously believe that invaders are welcomed by their victims?

Some people might think that the invaders could have achieved their goals very quickly had it not been for their concern for civilian Iraqi casualties. 24 hours of turning Baghdad into rubble by missiles and B52s and the war would be won, Saddam and his look-alikes running for their lives and the population kneeling in supplication. Is it American concern for children’s, women's and men's lives that stops them from going all out? Perish the thought. Americans don't give a damn for Iraqi or any other casualties outside of their own forces, and those only to the amount that it lowers the popularity percentage for the "president". As could be witnessed in Vietnam and the last Gulf war, some hundred thousands or even millions of deaths of the enemy is of no real concern to the American leadership. Indeed even poor Americans are of no concern to the American leadership as is evident by all the starving, homeless and uneducated in USA itself.

No, the reason for the unusual restraint and avoidance to bomb civilian areas in Baghdad is not concern for civilian lives. It's concern for international and internal support, future business and, since the Iraqi military will be needed to control the civilians when "rebuilding" Iraq after the war, some of them have to stay alive. The cost of the rebuilding should preferably, in spite of American companies taking the profits from it, not be too massive. The accumulated economical "support" from Denmark, Poland, Romania and others in rebuilding will, if anything, be enough just to erect a McDonalds-hut and not much else. The coalition of the unwilling has, if US and UK are discounted, not a bloody big economical clout. Most of them had to be bribed to give lip-support so the balance will probably even be negative!

We have today heard about a chemical weapons factory south of Baghdad being taken by the Americans. So far no independent proof has turned up and since it was first reported by a journalist from Jerusalem Post we should be very wary of it. It would come as no big surprise to find that US forces carries with them enough fabricated "proof" for its allegations of WMDs to keep a few divisions occupied. The last times we heard US claims of chemical weapons factories it was a bona fide medical facility in Sudan and a few jerricans of petrol or detergent in a shackle in Kabul. No American "evidence" should be believed unless corroborated by independent observers!!

Iraq has shown the first American prisoners of war on TV. A deplorable, but perhaps understandable demonstration of defiance. Let's hope that it will not be a habit. Iraq has promised to treat its prisoners according to the Geneva convention. Unelected Bush's warning yesterday "I expect Iraq to treat all prisoners humanely just as we will treat our prisoners according to the Geneva convention" would perhaps be more credible if we had not time and again seen how America has treated Afghanis, even octogenarions, at its concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay! It seems the "war criminal" allegation from Bush would apply to him as much as the Iraqis.

The international boycott that is starting against US, UK, Australia and Israel goods and currencies is already well on its way. The Arab world has embraced it and Europe is following. Let's deny aggressors any economical means to wage war. Personally I'd like boycotts going on against all countries who have WMDs until the day when they disarm and are declared free from such weapons by U.N.

Boycott US, UK, Australia and Israel! NO money for WAR!

Jerre Skog is a Swedish writer, musician and independent observer living in Germany. His writings, politics and satire, can be found on www.skog.de and comments are welcome at jerre@skog.de

NOTE

* Go awry