h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Why Rumsfeld? Why the US? Why any Judeo-Christian ethic, western style democracy imposing themselves on an unwelcoming political scene? Why not step aside and let a group of the self-same Islamic democracies help Iraq to determine it's own future? What give the right to the *victor* (especially only one member of a self-declared *Alliance*) to impose government, businesses, permanent military encampments, or beliefs?

Taking them in turn...

"Why Rumsfeld?" - It doesn't look like Rummy is anything more than peripherally involved at this time.

"Why any Judeo-Christian ethic, western style democracy imposing themselves on an unwelcoming political scene?" - Islam is a Judeo-Christian religion. Western-style democracy works. And the political scene sure was welcoming when those tanks arrived.

"Why not step aside and let a group of the self-same Islamic democracies help Iraq to determine it's own future?" - They have less experience, fewer resources.

"What give the right to the *victor* (especially only one member of a self-declared *Alliance*) to impose government, businesses, permanent military encampments, or beliefs?" - What makes you think a form of government is being "imposed"?

As for business, somebody has to get things started. The occupation force is the only entity in the country with the power to get things done.

Permanent military encampments... reference?

Beliefs... reference?

As for what gives the rights to the victor to manage all of this... how about self-sacrifice? Why would the US go to all that effort, risk all their people, and spend all that money, only to turn it over to the Turks, who might make a mess of it?

Maybe the US will make a mess of it, too, but they've earned the right to try. Whoever it is that messes it up, it's pretty clear that the US will be the ones to have to bear the responsibility of fixing it again. If they're going to have the responsibility, they deserve the authority that goes along with it.

Welcoming liberation is one thing, welcoming a permanent presence is another. We have had the *reference for permanent military camps* disagreement before, and I believe we came to the conclussion that signs point in that direction but nothing has been done yet. Very well, will you agree as a mental exercise that if permanent US military bases appear before a local government has become fully established that it would constitute imperialism? Would you agree that if it were to happen that the economic benefits of rebuilding the country fell almost exclusively to the US it would constitute economic imperialism?

As to your counterpoints-
*It doesn't look like Rummy is anything more than peripherally involved at this time.* Other than being near the heart of the govenment and having all those shares in all those related businesses that now have so much to do with Iraq?

*Western-style democracy works* Of course it does, but that doesn't mean other things, or even an Islamic version of other things do as well. Why does the US have to be the arbeiter?

*They have less experience, fewer resources* Than the US when it comes to setting up Islamic states? Or just rebuilding things they broke?

*What makes you think a form of government is being "imposed"?* When your buddy *Rummy* says that no fundamentalist Islamic government will be allowed. (Previous link)

*Maybe the US will make a mess of it, too, but they've earned the right to try.* More than the Spanish for instance, or the Austrailians? Does it go by body count or money spent? So now you are saying that the UN should be disbanded since it has no place in rebuilding a war-torn country?

My father told me that I should only give money to the Salvation Army and the Red Cross. The reason was that in all the places he was that had been devastated in any number of ways (and he had been to far too many), they were the only organisations that were 1) non political (he also referred to the Red Crescent) and 2) never asked for anything in return from the people they helped.

Some links on the subject:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/10/8/63000.shtml

http://afr.com/worldbusiness/2003/05/07/FFXNVMI7EFD.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd02242003.html

http://www.msnbc.com/news/890546.asp

Interesting to see Rumsfeld has fallen out of favour since Halliburton has been banned from helping rebuild Iraq.

"Only a peace between equals can last:" - wow, highschool history flash back.

and then forgave debts and helped them rebuild their nations. - 'forgave debts' doesn't match with Germany paying back the marshal plan.

(especially only one member of a self-declared *Alliance*) - can anyone tell me wether anyone but American corperates are benefiting from the rebuilding. Are there any spoils for the other members of the coalition of the killing?


"Why would the US go to all that effort, risk all their people, and spend all that money" - it's black, thick and flamable. Oh and there are to contracts awarded to companies that have ties to the administration. "ofcourse it's not illegal. They wrote the laws", 60 minutes.

"it's pretty clear that the US will be the ones to have to bear the responsibility of fixing it again" - or they could try staying away from where they're not wanted.

Rummy: As you said, he's fallen out of favor. You made my argument for me.

Why does the US have to be the arbiter: Because they paid the price.

"*They have less experience, fewer resources* Than the US when it comes to setting up Islamic states? Or just rebuilding things they broke?" - In rebuilding nations after a war. Do you know someone else who has done it with anywhere near the sort of success of the aftermath of WWII?

"When your buddy *Rummy* says that no fundamentalist Islamic government will be allowed." - Rummy is just removing an option from the table. There are still plenty of options remaining. The US has no desire to turn the country over to the next Ayatollah Khomeini. We've been down that road before in Afghanistan.

"*Maybe the US will make a mess of it, too, but they've earned the right to try.* More than the Spanish for instance, or the Austrailians? Does it go by body count or money spent? So now you are saying that the UN should be disbanded since it has no place in rebuilding a war-torn country?" - Spanish and Aussie assistance was token at best. They deserve an input into the process commensurate with the proportion of their contribution. That goes for the UK as well, whose contribution was formidable.

As for the UN, it failed to enforce its own legislation regarding Iraq because of partisan politics... too many countries on the Security Council were making money with Iraq. Partisan politics should not be allowed to interfere with the nation-building project.

As for your dad's advice, it's very good advice, but I'm not too sure about the Salvation Army, myself. Aren't they trying to convert the people they try to help? And don't you already have a problem with enforcing Judeo-Christian beliefs on people from other cultures?

As to the Salvation Army and to whether they proselytize, I know that in this country that is illegal, although I know it is not in yours. Internationally they have been accused repeatedly by Muslims, but each case has come down to an individuals zeal and that individual has been removed from the situation. Interestingly enough, in every case but a handful it has been US citizens and most of the rest were from the UK. Your own state department has found them blameless on several occasions:
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13982.htm
btw, I am not a religious man and neither was my father, he went with what he saw produced results that were palatable to the majority.

Khomeini was Iran, remember? And he took over from a US propped up dictator. They are in the long, slow climb from the mullah's grip and the population (the majority of which is under 30 now) is making changes albeit at a glacial pace. It is their pace (and place) though, not ours.

We could argue about the UN endlessly, I'll just say I will go with a flawed world organisation than a single country (don't even bother to trot out the *alliance* after saying the US *paid the price*).

As to WWII reparations and US involvement, yes indeed they did manage to admirably turn centuries old traditions and cultures into and brighter, newer, CocaCola almalgam when they didn't help create the Iron Curtain.

Saying that western-style democracy "works" is a bit much. Maybe saying it fails less spectacularly than other types would be more accurate.

To be honest I can't help wondering whether some of that Islamic Law stuff might be worth having a look at. You know, all the "no unfair enrichment" stuff, some of it makes sense. Capitalism has too many loopholes at the moment, and too much opportunity for getting unproductive jobs leeching off the system (otherwise known as bureacracy).

*Partisan politics should not be allowed to interfere with the nation-building project.*

Puleez! You don't think partisan politics in the US is interfering? Rumsfelt is only the first to be found out!
http://www.msnbc.com/news/890546.asp
It's a great big trough and the bigger piggies are doing quite well, thankyou.

"Capitalism has too many loopholes at the moment, and too much opportunity for getting unproductive jobs leeching off the system (otherwise known as bureacracy)." - Every other system has produced even more unproductive jobs leeching off the system. In oligarchies they were known as lords, courtiers, etc. In communist systems, it's the whole damned country. Capitalist systems function despite the functionaries... which is the chief advantage they have over oligarchies.

zoomer: Nobody is arguing that there are tons of dollars out their for reconstruction contracts. Who should get those contracts? That's where partisan politics would cripple the UN. And that's why the French and Russians were so desperate to get the UN in charge of the reconstruction... they wanted their share of the contracts.

The US and UK did the work and assumed the risks in dismantling the old regime, with token support from others. They've earned the right to disburse the contracts to their constituents.

capatalism only works when tempered with socalist institutions.

"The US and UK did the work and assumed the risks in dismantling the old regime, with token support from others. They've earned the right to disburse the contracts to their constituents."

Are there any benefits to the UK at all. zoomer, do know of any non american companies getting any contracts?

I will look, but off hand I do not.

My point was not who is going to get contracts in any case, it is who is going to make money and who is going to spend money. Is this all a great government handout to the companies at the taxpayer's expense? Are any politicians going to profit? Is it Iraq oil money going to US special interest groups? I suppose we will have to wait and see. I think a UN group (which already exists) that went in to rebuild would probably be less suspect on all those counts, though not to mention it would have Islamic representatives that the Iraqi people would be much more comfortable with. How well is Billy-Bob from Texas going to do when a minor official asks to rebuild the mosque before the Micky-D's that's on his schedule?

If Rumsfeld and the company he and the military were in bed with weren't exposed- they would be the *constituents* you speak of. Do you really think that that is the only instance?

Rumsfeld and his connections were revealed, because we have a free press. If there are other such connections, they will be revealed as well.

Or would you rather the French, who were selling AA weapons to the Iraqis to threaten US and UK planes with as they patrolled the no-fly zones in accordance with UN resolutions, get their hands on the contracts?

No, I wouldn't obviously. But a broken UN is not something to discard. Pulling into town with a six gun and an attitude is all right for film, but in the real world we are eventually going to learn how to all play well together.

As to a free press, it was a lucky press this time. The free press has very seldom prevented scandals, just revealed them after the fact. If you really believe that everything is above board I suppose once again we will just have to wait and see.

I just really hope that in ten years I will not be able to check into a HoJo's in Baghdad that feels just like the one in Portland or Quito.

So your real concern here is the preservation of the native hotel chain?

You can go into a HoJo's in Dubai that looks and feels exactly like the one in Portland (all right, it's a Red Lion, but the point is the same), and nobody dropped any bombs to make it happen.

The point was not the proliferation of Western hotel chains as you well know. The rebuilding of a country is not the building of a country. It is putting things back the way they were, with all the new things being what the populace wants not what the invader wants. Is that clear enough or are you going to say I want a dictator back?

This is a country with wide ethnic diversity and strong religious beliefs, the cradle of mankind in fact. Quite frankly I just don't trust the US to have much sympathy or consideration for those facts.

That's all well and good, but what does native culture have to do with rebuilding roads, and reactivating distribution of water and power?

The coalition is there to oversee the rebuilding of infrastructure. The last time I checked, McDonald's was not a part of an infrastructure.

Here are the roads, there is your water and power- see ya? Good luck with the mosques, the government structures, the museums, and the oil by the way. Oh and I trust you don't mind the military bases we decided to leave, take it up with your unelected government that we established.

Obviously that will not be as simple as you seem to think. War doesn't just destroy buildings and especially one which was the overthrow of a corrupt government. If you have seen one single news item that shows that the government coalition that has been established is more than squabbling Sunnis, Kurds, and wanabees, show it to me. The decisions to remake a country are being made in Washington and have absolutely nothing to do with the wishes of the people at this point.

zoomer, tried looking up a story I saw on 60 minutes about the contracts but the archive is only available to M$N members