[Peace-discuss] Revised Commentary submitted to Jay Pearce

[David Green]

	According to the Chicago Tribune of September 9th, 39
of the now more than 1,000 U.S. soldiers killed in
Iraq have been from Illinois. According to the website
costofwar.com, Illinois taxpayers have paid over $7
billion of the nearly $130 billion that has been spent
on this war. As local men and women in our military
continue be enlisted in our government's "war on
terrorism," it is vital to place the events of 9/11
and subsequent wars in the historical context of
American global ambitions. But when it comes to our
destructive invasion of Vietnam, the debate in the
media—including NPR—seems to be either about Kerry and
Bush’s military records, or about whether Vietnam is
relevant at all in the post 9/11 world.

	There are individual heroes, criminals, cowards,
evaders, and conscientious resisters in any war. But
both Vietnam and 9/11, as well as our current
predicament in Iraq, must be understood in the context
of the imperial history of U.S. foreign policy. This
history broadly includes U.S. relations with both
Latin America and Asia. But at the very least we must
consider U.S. policies in the Middle East since World
War II that have consistently viewed the people of
this region as pawns in the service of American
corporate interests. These interests translate into
control over the region's oil resources. Uncensored
and unflattering historical perspectives, including
our support for Israeli expansionism as consistent
with our economic interests, are vital for an
understanding of the continuities of U.S. foreign
policy, and the consistently aggressive actions by
leaders of both major political parties that until
9/11 had not resulted in an attack on our mainland.

	Apart from the diversionary charges regarding Kerry's
war record and Bush’s evasions, both candidates share
a dangerous historical myopia. Bush’s actions while in
office have repeated the deceptions and illegality of
the Vietnam War in Iraq. Meanwhile Kerry writes in A
Call to Service, "it's time to recognize (Vietnam) as
an exception, not a ruling example, of the U.S.
military engagements of the twentieth century." But I
would suggest that Vietnam can only be understood as a
particularly egregious example of the rule that the
U.S. is willing to use force against any country whose
popular aspirations threaten the interests and profits
of U.S.-centered global corporate capitalism. Since
World War II, this rule has been applied with
devastating results in Iran, Guatemala, the Congo,
Indonesia, Chile, Angola, Nicaragua, and elsewhere.

	We all want to avoid the pain of another event like
9/11. But to do so we must critically examine the
continuities of our history, and then fundamentally
change coercive U.S. foreign policies. It is my view,
on behalf of the Anti-war Anti-racism Effort, that
continued denial of the motives behind our violently
interventionist past and present only makes future
attacks more likely.



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail