A Missing Justification for Our Military Involvement in Middle East
Fighting Resolves Nothing
While being a humanist, I am also a pacifist, meaning that I would not fight for my humanistic ideology. Something like "fighting for peace" is in itself a contradiction to ever consider it, because in the hierarchy of my own mental and emotional tendencies I found out that fighting with an inner conflict only adds to the conflict, doesn't resolve it.
Besides, I know close to nothing about politics, and it doesn't stem from a lack of interest but from my cynicism about leaderships which, almost as a rule, ignore the interests of the majority of people, catering to those richest and most influential. Hence my disrespect for all their lying slogans about "freedom", "fairness", "equal justice for all", and other sterile clichés.
In the case of Middle East all western intervention is merely making my cynicism more justified, because we are not helping there, but rather taking care of some "national interests" of our own - while so many innocent folks have to pay with their lives for our covert motives.
It's like I can hear them say: "It's much more complex than that" - but it isn't, it all boils down to a basic disrespect of the "golden rule" which even sounds like one of those Commandments so often ignored : "Don't do to others what you don't want others do to you." Namely, how would we like if our streets got crowded with all kinds of foreign soldiers killing our people under this or that pretense? So much for all those slogans about "fairness".
It's All about Human Lives
The following is an attempt of a commentary about a major global issue without much information to support it - simply because the aspect of the theme doesn't call for any. Also, sometimes the clear view is obstructed by a mass of contradictory or even misleading data cramming the picture with unnecessary details. That would be an example for the saying "Can't see the tree for the forest".
As if it jumped out of the book "Lateral Thinking" by dr. Edward de Bono, the Middle East issue is pointing at the futile "vertical thinking" used to "resolve" the conflict, as it only keeps insisting on digging itself deeper and deeper into the same hole. A lateral move in any other direction might bring about some relief to those innocent civilians suffering the most.
I don't think a political solution is possible, simply because we are talking about different religions - but countries don't have to be enemies if they are not friends, there is something like tolerance between people. And maybe that tolerance would have been achieved by now if it was not for the West's constant interference in those people's affairs.
Could We, Humans, Stop Lying?
One of the biggest contradictions in our "noble intentions" is in the fact that we can spend millions in any currency to upgrade medical equipment for saving a life - and then mass- produce cheap bullets to destroy it. At that point I start questioning not only morality, but also intelligence of it all.
Especially, when those educated leaders and their possibly more educated advisors start rationalizing their resorting to primitive measures by sugar-coating them with political clichés. Do they really believe that their fancy rhetoric can be louder than that scream of a mother hovering over the dead body of her child?
It makes one wonder what morality those leaders are teaching to their children. Is it something like: "As long as you are stronger, you have justice on your side"? Indeed, after all those senseless killings in the Middle East, it doesn't matter who is going to outsmart whom with better lies. The conflict is so old that by now all warring camps must have run out of lies anyway, so it's all just replaying of the old political scenarios - with a neglected sad truth about overpopulated graveyards.
Leaders have a moral obligations to their citizens, not to the interests of their careers and interests of those who are financially benefiting from a war. It's such a shame of the 21st century world to see this massive migration of people having to leave their homes because of political idiocies of all camps involved.
When I see it on my TV screen, for a moment I think it's a historical movie about some other era when the greed of the kings caused such massive tragedies, not the news from a region of the world's oldest cultures known.
The Big Paradox
These days, while thinking about ISIS, Al Qaida, Taliban, and the rest of those dark forces keeping that region in the fighting mode of coexistence - I am asking myself how it all started. Not for a moment did I buy the explanation of terrorism in western countries as "their hate of our freedoms and democracy".
For a lack of being well informed politically, I am thinking in some simple terms. Like, why did we go there, and what's keeping us there - since it sounds logical to me that our military presence in the Middle East is not really welcome, no matter what we are trying to make it look like.
Really, since those weapons of the mass destruction were nowhere to be found, why did we go there? The excuse became something that no one of a sane mind could accept - "to liberate those people of Saddam Hussein's regime". Come on, the most of Middle East had the same regime - including some of our friends there, and we didn't send out troops to "liberate all those poor people or a tyranny".
How do you install "democracy" in a country where religion is not treating women as equal to men? What kind of morons were supposed to buy that story, because people don't modify their religion to please anyone. Those teachings are literally carved in stone there.
Just look how silly it turned out: some half million of people, mostly civilians had to die, with countless children being crippled, blinded, and traumatized for the rest of their lives - because "we were so generous and noble to rid them of their tyrannical leader".
The craziest of it all is the fact that their tyrannical leader would have never killed so many of them as their "saviors" did. How is that for a paradox? Imagine, you call exterminators to destroy the mice infestation in your house, so they come and use dynamite, killing much of your family and flatten your house. Then, because there is a suspicion of their presence in neighboring houses, they also destroy half of the houses in the street.
Why Impose Our Ways?
Besides, who told us that those folks wanted something like democracy? Is our democracy a shiny example of justice, freedom, equality, and fairness? Come on, folks, who are we kidding! Just because "some of them" expressed their being pissed off with those regimes doesn't mean an invitation to our troops to go there and raise the hell in lives of all those people.
You know, and I know, there are many pissed off people right here in the heart of democracy - and yet no one is coming to "rescue us from our regime". We love our version of democracy so much that we just can't fathom that some folks of different religion, tradition, and general views about morality don't want what we have.
Those people believe in a good dose of national discipline, even if exaggerated by our standards - but in their views our freedoms could also be a major exaggeration where practically "anything goes". Maybe they are laughing at us, and from their point of view we are not making any sense with our drug problem, prostitution, pornography, alcoholism, divorces and infidelities, our liberal interpretation of Jesus's teachings and its morality, looting to "send a message about our just cause", and some other pearls of our freedoms.
However, since we are so much about "freedoms", why is it so hard for us to accept that those folks don't want us to deprive them of their freedom to be as they choose? Who are we to tell anybody how to live? Are we sure we are doing such a great job at home? Couldn't we use some of that war-machinery money for education, for a better health care insurance, anything?
So that no one gets any wrong ideas - of course, I don't approve of much of their ways, but I don't see how is that any of my business how others want to live. And if I want to save my face from looking a two-faced smart ass - I won't go harsh about someone's ways if those same ways don't bother me at my friends.
Now, getting back to that first question of this article: is it possible that we have created all those enemies with our unhealthy interventions? When G.W. Bush said to the world after the 9/11 tragedy : "You are either with us or against us", didn't he make those "reluctant friends" vulnerable to terrorism because they bought his story of the weapons of the mass destruction and joined him in his crazy crusade?
And finally, how is our military presence there "helping" - either them or ourselves, if only more and more innocent civilians are getting killed, and more and more we are likely to suffer some more acts of terrorism on our soil? What "smart" brains are behind all this futile and paradoxical idiocy? Are we ever going to learn that we are not welcome, but imposing?