Back to The Bush Presidency indexWill the United States achieve security through increased intelligence and a policy of military intervention overseas?
It is useful to look at the long-term results of interfering with the affairs of other countries and cultures. Let's see. . . intelligence led us to intervene in Iran and oust the democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mosedegh, in order to guarantee our access to Iranian oil fields. This action led to the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the taking of American hostages by the Ayatollah, whose government was far more anti-American than Dr. Mosedegh's would have been. Because of the Ayatollah's anti-Americanism, intelligence led us to arm and support Saddam Hussein, whose secular government was supposed to "balance the region." Intelligence led us to arm and train the Islamic Fundamentalist Mujahedeen in Afganistan, because they were the most likely to prevail against the Soviet-backed Northern Alliance. After September 11, we decided to back the Northern Alliance based on intelligence that they would most likely give us access to oil fields in Kazakstan and Turkmenistan.
With the track record of U.S.
"intelligence" and intervention, can anyone
really make the case that our security has been
increased? Or has the interests of weapons manufacturers
and the oil industry trumped our national
security interests? Perhaps true security lies in the
disarmament of the world by the United Nations,
beginning with Iraq!
Lane Anderson
Secretary, S.B. Chapter of Veterans for Peace
Nov. 21, 2002
http:/www.veteransforpeace.org/
Back to The Bush Presidency index