Write your abstract here.Curtains of War
Once again, the U.S.
impending pull out of Iraq
manifests an oversight
of America''s
foreign policy. It demonstrates America''s
paper tiger diplomacy.
A paper tiger diplomacy is a foreign relation strategy based on saber rattling
strength.
The U.S.
policy makers have mastered this strategy at the expense of the American
people.
It is lamentable that victims of this modern day aggression are less
developed countries LDC in Asia. Most Asian
countries are rich in natural resources and raw materials needed by highly
developed countries.
Moving back four decades ago, the U.S.
government waged war against the peoples in Vietnam then a less developed country in Southeast Asia.
The Vietnamese people fought tooth and nail, digging mountains and rice paddies
as natural defenses against the U.S.
modern armament.
Thousands of Vietnamese people died along with American martyrs who went out to
war without them knowing why, except upholding G.I. Joe''s quest of an ideal
democracy.
That was 40 years ago where the U.S.
policy makers justified the attack on Vietnam
under the guise of defending Democracy in Asia.
Aside from the then brewing "cold war" with Russia in Europe, Mao Tse Tungcultural revolution in China at that time were the focal point of
struggle against foreign aggression in Asia.
It was then the rise of China
that threatened the U.S.
government''s "democratic stronghold" in Asia
that prompted American policy makers to wage war against the Vietnamese people.
All in the name of democracy!
Unfortunately, the U.S.
democratic ideals were no match to the Vietnamese people''s resolve to die in
defense of the nation''s self-esteem and independence.
After almost 40 years of war, the Americans pulled out of Vietnam. The U.S. government then spent billions of dollars
and lost some 58,000 men before the war in Vietnam finally ended.
Three decades later, the U.S.
government eyed on oil-rich Middle East
countries fearing the possible emergence of a superpower. First, it was Libya where America
expressed apprehensions of Khadaffy,
Libya''s strongman, rise to
power.
Before Khadaffy could prove the U.S.
government wrong, America''s
allies imposed an economic embargo on Libya. By then, the word
"terrorist" was coined by American foreign policy advisers in
describing Khadaffy!
The U.S. government then
made a valid argument on imposing Low Intensity Conflict (LIC) in the Middle East.
The LIC was the most applicable albeit hideous U.S.
foreign policy in the Middle East as Israelites and Palestine people engaged in a tug-of-war on
claiming territorial rights.
The volatile condition in the Middle East then justified America''s
aggressive socio-political and economic policy in Arab countries.
The 9/11 carnage, provoked America
the more as President George Bush
Jr. described the attack as a "declaration of war" against the
American people.
From Israel to Saudi Arabia and Libya,
the U.S. government had
short listed the countries of Iran
and Iraq
as possible coddler of terrorists responsible for the 9/11
attacked.
Unable to release its boiling anger of revenge, America dropped its
Sword of
Damocles on the head of Iraq by accusing then Iraq President Saddam Hussein to be discreetly developing nuclear warheads and as principal sponsor of world
terrorist Osama Ben Laden erstwhile a Middle East-based CIA trained
operative.
Ben Laden, an Arab heir to a family fortune in Saudi
Arabia, was tagged as the principal suspect of the 9/11
suicide bombing of New York''s
financial center.
Failing to capture Ben Laden and suspecting Iraq
as possible coddler, the U.S.
government have more than a dozen reasons to pour its vengeful frustration
on Saddam, an outspoken anti-American Iraq leader.
Thus, Iraq''s
ill-starred horizons were lit with comet-like missiles thereby raisir on Saddam''s desert.
Bush believed that people around the world agreed on his arguments that led
to America''s attacked
on Iraq.
But, contrary to ordinary thinking of Americans, Bush attacked on Iraq was not
precipitated by the 9/11attacked neither it was on suspicion that Ben Laden
were being kept by Saddam.
Verily, Bush attacked Iraq
in a bid to control the flow of oil in the Middle East.
By imposing an imperial authority on Iraq,
oil prices in America
will definitely be cheaper than the rest of the world.
But, like Vietnam, the U.S. government knows that their war policy
against Iraq
is not going to succeed.
The Bush administration and his foreign think-tank know this beforehand.
It was Irag War) carried out to appease a restless America
against the 9/11 attacked and to venture on new economic base in the Middle East.
Now, the pull out of American forces in Iraq is taking shape.
The U.S.
government is leaving a country after succeeding on sowing chaos and anarchy.
It succeeded in destroying Iraq,
once a progressive and highly developed Middle Eastern country whose people are
proud of their toils.
In the end, the tiger in the West is tearing the curtains of war it raised to
intimidate determined people in the likes of Vietnam
and Iraq.
When will U.S.
stop exporting war?
Political analysts around the world share common thoughts that the U.S. government
remains the most powerful financier/instigator of pocket rebellion now active
in many parts of the world.
How would an ordinary American feel if the curtains of war unfold in its own
soil?####