Is the re-building of a nation we have been bent on destroying really our objective? Chomsky's take on it is something that should be obvious, but never seems to be. Our complaints about the new Iraqi government are part of an old pattern:
Colonial administrators, slave masters, and others like them constantly express great irritation at the shiftlessness and irresponsibility of their wards, not properly following commands -- issued for their benefit, of course.
Imagine the nerve of those Iraqis, not taking our benevolent instructions and following them to the letter...
The Nation article linked here also shows pre-meditated plans for our use of Iraq after the war. The administration would have us think that we are re-building the country out of benevolence, but perhaps there is another motivation? All of the discussion regarding timetables, governments, and the like are a constant, clear message that we think we know what is best for Iraq - better than the Iraqis do - and that they should follow our instructions unconditionally. This is simply a reflection of how our government treats its domestic issues as well - our government knows how to live our lives better than we do.
As Chomsky says:
How can we help the Iraqi people? By putting them in charge, and doing what they instruct us to do -- which, judging by US-run polls, would mean getting out pretty quickly.
Right, as usual. |
Posts
