Critics of the Bush administration’s War on Terror, WoT in general and the invasion and occupation of Iraq insist that it is so ill-conceived, wrong-headed, and ill-executed that rather than achieve their executors’ proclaimed outcomes of making the world safer from Islamist terrorism, will and are exacerbating the scourge by doing otherwise. It does not take the services of a seer for an honest observer to discern from the deluge of news reports each week that the world is far from being safe from the heartless individuals who wrap themselves with the jihadist banner of Islamism and present themselves as willing zealots ready to embark on any manner of terrorist acts that unleash terror on unsuspecting people.
The recent terror-related events in Britain involving well-educated individuals from Iraq and India do not just underscore the view that the world is increasingly unsafe; they should also be cause for worry for every sensible person anywhere in the world. For one, Britain was never a target of Islamist terrorism prior to its involvement in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Apart from Spain, which under the previous government was also a member of the clique of three that embarked on the invasion of Iraq with Mr. Bush, no other society has been targeted by Islamist terror as much as Britain since the invasion of Iraq. The lives of unsuspecting members of society have been turned upside down in virtually every part of the world because of the looming prospects of terrorist attacks. International travelers and other users of air transportation are so concerned of their safety these days that some of them resort to executing or updating their will each time before they embark on trips. We know where it all began, but we do not know when it will end.
Meanwhile, US politicians, particularly the ardent Republicans who blindly lined up support for the invasion and continuing occupation of Iraq are finding it just expedient to re-calibrate their position on the occupation just to suit their political survival. In the last few weeks the gradual shift in the support of the occupation noticed in some Republican Party senators is evidently inspired by fear that they might loose their seats in their re-election bid next year. The latest shift in stance of support was expressed just yesterday by New Mexico’s Pete Domenici who is facing re-election next year. Earlier, it was the turn of Virginia’s John Warner, who is also billed for re-election next year. The troubling aspect of the shift in the support of these individual US senators for the occupation of Iraq is that it is just enough to enable a campaign stance that could translate into a message to win as many votes from many of the voters whose initial support for the invasion and occupation has completely soured. Mr. Domenici who is “not calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq or a reduction in funding for our troops” merely railed against an “Iraqi government [which] is not making measurable progress”. He is calling “for a new strategy that will move our troops out of combat operations and on the path to continuing home”. How that path will unmake all the wrong-headed aspects of the policy of invasion and occupation is yet to be figured out.
It is high time for the rest of the world to rally and come up on their own with anti-terror policies capable of succeeding. Someone mentioned the other time that such a policy will necessarily not involve the US so along as it is intent on waging the WoT as it currently conceived it. Humanity cannot afford to continuing living in fear and stress. The world must rally and begin the task of protecting and saving itself.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment