Opinion Editorials, September 2007
|
|
What Can Be Read In Sir Mike Jackson's Criticism?
By Ali Al-Hail
ccun.org, September 8, 2007
The Latest developments in Iraq are observed to have produced most surprisingly, interesting outcomes politically, as well as militarily. The retreat of the British 5,500 strong occupation force from Al-Basra, in Southern Iraq to seek 'seemingly', a safe heaven at its airport had undoubtedly, sent shockwaves to the already volatile US-led- coalition in Iraq.
As a result, it is mostly, left to the US. occupation forces to deal with the resilient resistance since, the participation of the few remaining states in the US.-Led- coalition forces is almost symbolic. Many observers argue that, the British back away from what once was believed to be a catholic marriage with the US –led-coalition, had been a slam on the face during a most critical time and a huge blow to the coalition. The event was so effective to the point that, it had made President Bush, all of a sudden to visit Iraq and to get on the defensive before his occupation troops, playing down the British recoil as extraneous.
Although, the British public opinion according to the many opinion polls have since, their country and the U.S.A. went it alone and invaded Iraq four years ago been completely, against the war their impact had been limited. However, the two key most senior British generals' most striking revealing recently, about the mess of the Bush ministration in Iraq had turned the whole game in Iraq upside-down.
General Sir Mike Jackson, the British commander-in-chief during the invasion, stunned the world by confessing to the Daily Telegraph on Saturday September 1st, 2007, that, from the very kick-off start, the neo-cons' plan was "intellectually bankrupt". In other words, the whole neo-cons' mess in Iraq was, wrong from A to Z. The infamous pro-Israeli Lobby, John Bolton also, former US ambassador to the UN, rejected Sir Mike Jackson's criticism as "way off the mark".
Sir Mike had ferociously, attacked a public statement made by Mr. Rumsfeld's, another staunch pro-Israel Lobby that, the U.S.A. occupation forces "don't do nation-building" as "nonsensical". One would presume, as would many that, the neo-cons' policy in Iraq was "intellectually bankrupt" because, it had not been based on genuine reasons e.g., removing a potential threat against the U.S.A.
The plan rather was put long before the war on Iraq to destroy Iraq's nascent industry that, was seen by many Arabs as a dream that could've come true. The aim, despite what's publicly, declared to serve the security of Israel on the long run. This is what can be read between the lines in Sir Mike Jackson's interview with The Daily Telegragh in London. Therefore, the neo-cons' agenda was never interested in re-building Iraq. BUT, to do totally, the contrary. To ruin it so, Iraq wouldn't be able to regain the industrial level it had achieved. The goal of course, is to leave Israel as the sole GIANT of the 'WISHFUL' new Middle East.
Professor, Dr. Ali Al-Hail, Professor of Mass Communication, Twice Fulbright Award Winner, Fulbright Visiting Scholar, and Board Member of AUSACE ASC, IABD, NEBAA, BEA, IMDA and EAJMC American Associations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||
