Changes

<h2>=Much more is at stake in this war than the future of Saddam Hussein</h2>=

The one good argument for [[war ]] against [[Iraq ]] is evoked by [[Christopher Hitchens]]: The majority of Iraqis are Saddam’s [[Saddam]]’s victims, and they would be really glad to be rid of him. He is such a catastrophe for his country that an American occupation in <i>whatever</i> form is a much brighter prospect for Iraqi citizens. We are not talking here of “bringing Western "bringing [[West]]ern [[democracy ]] to Iraq,” " but of just getting rid of the nightmare called [[Saddam]]. To this majority, the caution expressed by Western liberals [[West]]ern [[liberal]]s cannot but appear deeply hypocritical. Do they really care about how the Iraqi people feel?<br><br>

In the same vein, I remember dozens of Western leftists [[West]]ern [[left]]ists in the early ‘90s '90s who proudly crowed that “Yugoslavia "[[Yugoslavia]] still exists,” " and reproached me for betraying the unique chance of maintaining Milosevic’s Yugoslavia—to [[Milosevic]]’s [[Yugoslavia]] — to which I always answered that I am not yet ready to lead my life so that it will not disappoint Western leftist [[West]]ern [[left]]ist dreams. Few attitudes are more crassly [[ideology|ideological ]] than a tenured Western [[West]]ern [[academia|academic ]] arrogantly dismissing (or, even worse, “understanding”) an [[Eastern European Europe]]an from an ex-communist country who longs for Western [[West]]ern [[liberal democracy ]] and some consumer goods.<br><br>

However, it is all too easy to slip from this recognition to the notion that “under "under their skin, Iraqis are just like us, and really want the same as we do.” " All we need to do is just give people a chance, liberate them from their imposed constraints, and they will join us in our ideological dream. No wonder an American official used the term “capitalist revolution” "[[capitalist revolution]]" to describe what Americans are now doing: exporting their revolution all around the world. They have moved from “containing” "containing" the [[enemy ]] to a more [[aggression|aggressive ]] stance. Like the defunct [[Soviet Union ]] decades ago, the [[United States ]] is now the country subversively fomenting world revolution. [[Bush ]] recently declared: “The "The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world, it is God’s gift to humanity.” " Indeed, and the United States just happens to be the chosen [[instrument ]] for distributing this [[gift]].<br><br>

Abstract [[pacifism ]] is intellectually stupid and morally wrong—one wrong — one has to stand up against a threat. Of course the fall of [[Saddam ]] would be a relief to a large majority of Iraqi people, and a whiff of [[liberal ]] hypocrisy does taint many of the stated reasons against [[war]]. But the impending invasion and occupation of Iraq is still wrong—because wrong — because <i>who is leading it</i> makes it wrong. This is not a question of [[war ]] or [[peace ]] in the short term, but of the “gut feeling” "gut feeling" that something is terribly wrong with this war, that something will irretrievably change with it.<br><br>

One cannot but agree: The future of Jacques Lacan’s more outrageous statements the international [[community]] is at stake now — the new [[rules]] thatwill regulate it, even if what the [[new world order]] will be. We are in the midst of a jealous husband claims about his unfaithful wife is all true"[[silent revolution]], his jealousy is still pathological. The same should be said today about " in which the claim unwritten rules that “Saddam has weapons of mass destruction!” Even if this claim is true (and it probably isdetermine the most elementary international logic are changing. Washington scolded [[German]] Prime Minister [[Gerhard Schröder]], at least to some degree)a democratically elected leader, it is still false with regard to for maintaining an anti-war stance supported by the position from which it is enunciated. Everyone knows that this war is about more than weapons large majority of mass destructionGermans. But it is about more than oil In [[Turkey]], according to opinion polls, too94 percent of the people are opposed to allowing U. As ardent hawks William Kristol and Lawrence FS. Kaplan write troops in their recent <i>The War Over Iraq,</i> the impending occupation “is about more even than the future of the Middle East and country for the war on terror. It Where is about what sort [[democracy]] here? Those who pose as global defenders of role democracy are the United States intends to play in the twenty-first centuryones who are effectively undermining it.”<br><br>

One cannot but agree: The future of the international community It is at stake now—the new rules crucial to remember that will regulate it, what the new world order will be. We are present regime in the midst [[Iraq]] is ultimately a [[secularism|secular]] [[nationalism|nationalist]] one, out of a “silent revolutiontouch with [[Muslim]] [[fundamentalism|fundamentalist]] [[populism]]. Obviously,” in which the unwritten rules that determine the most elementary international logic are changing[[Saddam]] only superficially flirts with pan-Arab Muslim sentiment. Washington scolded German Prime Minister Gerhard Schröder As his past clearly demonstrates, he is a democratically elected leaderpragmatic ruler striving for [[power]], who shifts alliances when it fits his purposes — first against [[Iran]] to grab their oil fields, then against [[Kuwait]] for maintaining an antithe same reason, bringing against himself a pan-war stance supported by Arab coalition allied with the large majority of Germans[[United States]]. In Turkey [[Saddam ]]is <i>not</i> a fundamentalist obsessed with the "Great Satan, according " ready to opinion polls, 94 percent of blow the people are opposed world apart just to allowing get him. What can emerge as a result of U.S. troops occupation, however, is a truly [[fundamentalism|fundamentalist]] [[Muslim]], anti-American movement, directly linked to such movements in their country for the warother Muslim countries. Where is democracy here? Those who pose as global defenders of democracy are the ones who are effectively undermining it.<br><br>

It is crucial to remember Direct American occupation of a large and key Arab country — how could this not generate a reaction of universal [[hatred]]? One can already imagine thousands of young people dreaming of becoming [[suicide]] bombers, and how that will force the present regime in Iraq is ultimately U.S. government to impose a secular nationalist one, out of touch with Muslim fundamentalist populism. Obviously, Saddam only superficially flirts with panpermanent high-Arab Muslim sentimentalert [[emergency state]]. As his past clearly demonstrates At this point, he is one cannot resist a pragmatic ruler striving for power, who shifts alliances when it fits his purposes—first against Iran to grab their oil fields, then against Kuwait for slightly [[paranoia|paranoid]] temptation: What if the same reason, bringing against himself a pan-Arab coalition allied with the United States. Saddam is people around [[Bush]] <i>notknow</i> a fundamentalist obsessed with this, what if this "[[collateral damage]]" is the “Great Satan,” ready to blow true aim of the world apart just to get him. entire operation? What can emerge as a result if the true target of U.S. occupation, however, the "[[war on terror]]" is a truly fundamentalist Muslim, anti-American movement, directly linked to such movements in other Muslim countries.society itself — the disciplining of its emancipatory excesses?<br><br>

Direct American occupation of a large and key Arab country—how could this not generate On March 5, MSNBC’s <i>Buchanan &amp; Press</i> show displayed a reaction photo of universal hatred? One can already imagine thousands the recently captured Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the "third man of young people dreaming of becoming suicide bombers[[al-Qaeda]]" — a mean visage, in an unspecified nightgown prison-dress, half opened and how with something like bruises half-discernible, hints that will force the Uhe was already [[torture]]d.S. government to impose a permanent high-alert emergency state. At [[Pat Buchanan]]’s fast voice was asking: "Should this pointman who knows all the names, one cannot resist a slightly paranoid temptation: What if all the detailed plans for the future terrorist attacks on the people around Bush <i>know</i> thisUnited States, be tortured, what if so that we get all this “collateral damage” is the true aim out of him?" The horror was that the entire operation? What if photo already suggested the true target of answer. No wonder the “war on terror” is American society itself—the disciplining response of its emancipatory excesses?<br><br>other commentators and viewers’ calls was an overwhelming "Yes!"

On March 5, MSNBC’s This is a pretty close realization of what [[Orwell]] imagined in <i>Buchanan &amp; Press[[1984]]</i> show displayed a photo of the recently captured Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s "[[hate sessions]], " where the “third man [[citizenship|citizens]] are shown photos of al-Qaeda”—a mean visage, in an unspecified nightgown prison-dress, half opened the traitors and supposed to boo and with something like bruises half-discernible, hints that he was already torturedyell at them. Pat Buchanan’s fast voice was asking: “Should this man who knows all And the names, all the detailed plans for the future terrorist attacks story goes on the United States: A day later, be tortured, so a [[FOX News]] commentator claimed that we get all are allowed to do with this out prisoner whatever we want — deprive him of sleep, break his fingers, etc. — because he is "a piece of him?” The horror was that the photo already suggested human garbage with no rights whatsoever." That such [[public]] [[statement]]s are possible today is the answertrue catastrophe. No wonder the response of other commentators and viewers’ calls was an overwhelming “Yes!”<br><br>

This is a pretty close realization of what Orwell imagined in <i>1984</i>’s “hate sessions,” where the citizens are shown photos of the traitors and supposed to boo and yell at them. And the story goes on: A day later, a FOX News commentator claimed that we are allowed to do with this prisoner whatever we want—deprive him of sleep, break his fingers, etc.—because he is “a piece of human garbage with no rights whatsoever.” That such public statements are possible today is the true catastrophe.<br><br> We should therefore be very attentive not to fight ancillary battles: the debates on how bad [[Saddam ]] is, or on how much the [[war ]] will cost, even on how well (or poorly) the occupation is proceeding. The focus should be on what effectively goes on in our [[culture]], on what kind of society is emerging here as the result of the “war "[[war on terror]].” " The ultimate result of this war will be a change in our [[political ]] [[order]]. http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/565/