Slava Yatsko gives...

Two Reasons for the USA to Continue the War in Iraq

In March 2003 Mr. Putin, President of Russia, made an official statement denouncing the invasion of Iraq by the USA and its allies:

Military actions are taking place contrary to the world public opinion, contrary to the principles and norms of international law and the Charter of the UN. Nothing can justify this military action - neither accusations of Iraq of supporting international terrorism (we have never had and do not have information of this kind) nor the desire to change the political regime in that country which is in direct contradiction to international law and should be determined only by the citizens of this or that state. At last there was no need in conducting hostilities to answer the main question asked by the international community, i.e. if Iraq has or doesn’t have weapons of mass destruction. ...Military actions against Iraq are a political blunder.

Now, four years after the beginning of the invasion, we see that:

no weapons of mass destruction had been found;
more than 3,000 Americans and about 100,000 Iraqis have been killed;
the war has become so unpopular with Americans that President Bush and his administration have lost all public support;
President Bush has decided almost to double the number of American troops in Iraq.

These results give rise to some serious questions that haven’t been answered yet:

Why did the administration of President Bush decide to invade Iraq? The surface motive postulated by the representatives of the administration was that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction at his disposal. Substantiating this fact, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld referred to the intelligence data obtained by the CIA.

Today it is clear that Iraq did not have any weapons of mass destruction. Does that mean that the CIA provided false data based on which the US government decided to start the war? I am far from such a primitive interpretation; the CIA is too professional and competent an organization to make such mistakes.

I also reject slanderous fabrications according to which the USA decided to seize and control Iraq’s oil fields. Americans are a noble and peaceful nation that has never demonstrated greed, avarice, rapacity, or selfishness; they cannot be driven by such base feelings. The American administration must have some higher motives and valid reasons to take responsible decisions.
Another and, perhaps, more intriguing question is: Why did President Bush decide to increase the American military contingent notwithstanding American public opinion and the opposition from Congress? It is obvious that this decision will contribute to the unpopularity of his Republican administration. It gives a trump card to the Democrats during the 2008 election; the Republican candidate is very unlikely win it.

In this short essay I’ll try to answer these questions, to reveal the inner motives and magnanimous reasons that underlie the decisions of President Bush and his administration.

Reason one: the War in Iraq has caused a significant rise in oil prices that have benefited a number of underdeveloped oil-producing countries, such as Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Nigeria, etc.

I can conjecture that this consequence was, of course, carefully calculated by American government analysts and that President Bush decided to invade Iraq in order to raise living standards in these poor countries.

I don’t know about Iran or Venezuela, but as for Russia Bush’s efforts were definitely not in vain. The shower of “oil dollars” influenced favorably all spheres of Russian life. President Putin formulated the concept of Russia as an “energy superpower” and started wide-scale national projects to improve education and health care and to increase the birth rate.

In the last three years, the standard of living in my country has doubled or even trebled. Almost all families have computers, cell phones, and access to the Internet; many families have two cars; many people can afford to travel abroad for winter and summer vacations. My own salary has tripled, and for this I express my personal gratitude to President Bush!

Evidently the rise in oil prices has damaged American national interests in a way, but the key characteristic of George W. Bush as a political leader is that he has at heart the interests of the poor people of the world; they are dearer to him than the well-being of his fellow American citizens. It is this motive that accounts for and underlies all the actions of this noble and wise personage.
Reason two: the War in Iraq is aimed at a reduction of the American population.

The mass media recently reported that the population of the USA reached 300 million, and immediately some experts expressed concerns about the devastating effects of a further increase in the number of Americans, because even now they consume more that 50% of the world’s resources. If they continue to multiply, Earth’s resources will soon be exhausted.

I can assure these short-sighted experts that there is nothing to worry about: President Bush has taken and will take all measures to reduce the American population.

As I noted earlier, the losses of American troops in Iraq exceed 3,000. This figure seems insignificant at first sight, but don’t forget that all the people killed in Iraq were robust young fellows who could have had families and children. Taking into account the fact that an average American family has three children, we can safely triple the casualty total to 9,000.

President Bush is sure not to stop half-way; he has decided to double the American military contingent in order to double American losses in Iraq. Recent events in the Persian Gulf, such as a concentration of armed forces and aircraft carriers, give firm grounds to suppose that war with Iran will start in the very near future. It will cause enormous losses and significantly reduce the number of American people, thus preventing the devastating effects of their vital activities. And don’t forget about the 1,200 U.S. military killed during the war in Afghanistan, launched by President Bush in 2001.

These facts present another piece of evidence that George W. Bush adheres to the interests of all people in the world rather than to the interests of his own nation. And for this we must be grateful to this outstanding man.

In conclusion I must admit that President Putin, my idol, was wrong. The invasion of Iraq was not a political blunder; it was a far-sighted plan with aims that cannot be easily comprehended by ordinary minds.