Contrary to the view of most American progressives that oil, and specificallythe interests of Big Oil, is the primary mover, there is no evidencethat the major US oil corporations pressured Congress or promoted the warin Iraq or the current confrontation with Iran. To the contrary: thereis plenty of evidence that they are very uneasy about the losses that mayresult from an Israeli attack on Iran. Furthermore, it seems reasonableto suppose that Big Oil is far from happy about taking the rap for allthat is happening in the Middle East, particularly when it combines withpublic anger at high gas prices, and leads to Senate inquiries.
Another innovative act by our armed forces was a new version of trench warfare. During the ground war, the USA deployed vehicles that were essentially tanks with bulldozer blades. The ground war, as with the air war, was not a war in any meaningful sense. It was another "turkey shoot," and entire armored divisions of Iraq's army were decimated without returning even one effective shot. The surviving Iraqi soldiers were generally fleeing, hiding in their bunkers, or rushing to surrender. Many thousands of Iraqi soldiers were huddled in trenches and bunkers, and some attempted to mount a pitiful defense to the juggernaut bearing down on them. The tank-bulldozers performed an unprecedented act: they approached the trenches and bunkers and filled them with earth, burying thousands of Iraqi soldiers alive. It qualified as another war crime. Not one American was killed in the live entombment of thousands of Iraqi soldiers.
War in Iraq: An Unnecessary War Essay
The connection between Israel and the Iraq war was widely recognizedlong before the fighting started. When the prospect of an American invasionwas beginning to dominate the headlines in the fall of 2002, the journalistMichael Kinsley wrote that "the lack of public discussion about therole of Israel ... is the proverbial elephant in the room: Everybody seesit, no one mentions it.12 The reason for this reluctance, he observed,was fear of being labeled an anti-Semite. Two weeks before the war started,Nathan Guttman reported in Ha'aretz that "the voices linking Israelto the war are getting louder and louder. It is claimed the desire to helpIsrael is the major reason for President George Bush sending American soldiersto a superfluous war in the Gulf. And the voices come from all directions.''13
I Miss Iraq. I Miss My Gun. I Miss My War.
Pro-lsrael groups - and not only neoconservatives - have long been inter-ested in having the U.S. military directly involved in the Middle Eastso that it can help protect Israel. They are especially interested in seeinglarge numbers of American troops permanently stationed there.155 But theyhad limited success on this front during the Cold War, because Americaacted as an offshore balancer in the region. Most U.S. forces designatedfor the Middle East, like the Rapid Deployment Force, were kept "overthe horizon" and out of harm's way. Washington maintained a favorablebalance of power by playing local powers against each other, which is whythe Reagan administration supported Saddam against revolutionary Iran duringthe Iran-Iraq War ( 1980-88).
In this essay I hope to convince you that George W
Not to be outdone, Martin Kramer, a research fellow at WINEP, claimsthat any attempt to link Israel and the lobby with the war in Iraq is "simplya falsehood," arguing that "in the year preceding the Iraq War,Israel time and again disagreed with the United States, arguing that Iranposed the greater threat.173 But as shown above, Israel's concerns aboutIran never led it to undertake a significant effort to halt the march towar. To the contrary, top Israeli officials were doing everything in theirpower to make sure that the United States went after Saddam and did notget cold feet at the last moment. They considered Iraq a serious threatand were convinced that Bush would deal with Iran after he finished withIraq. They might have preferred that America focus on Iran before Iraq,but as Kramer admits, Israelis "shed no tears over Saddam's demise."Instead, their leaders took to the American airwaves, wrote op-eds, testifiedbefore Congress, and worked
Research Papers on the War in Iraq ..
The Iraq war was not supposed to be a costly quagmire. Rather, it wasintended as the first step in a larger plan to reorder the Middle Eastin ways that would benefit long-term American and Israeli interests. Specifically,the United States was not just going to remove Saddam Hussein from powerand go home; the invasion and occupation would, in this dream, quicklyturn Iraq into a democracy, which would then serve as an attractive modelfor people living in the various authoritarian states in the region. Theresults from Iraq would trigger a cascade of democratic dominoes, althoughit still might be necessary to use the sword to spread democracy to somecountries in the Middle East besides Iraq. But once democracy took holdacross the region, regimes friendly to Israel and the United States wouldbe the norm, the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians would, inthe words of the "Clean Break" study, be "transcended,"other regional rivalries would be muted, and the twin problems of terrorismand nuclear proliferation would largely disappear.