posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 04:50 AM
I am opening this thread to do two things
1) To explain my hypothesis of what I believe to be the Broader Middle East srategy devolped by the Bush administration.
2) To ask the rest of you what you think the broader Middle East strategy is.
Having recently reviewed the events in the WOT since 9/11 I believe I am beginning to perceive a bigger picture which if my theroy is correct is
stunning in its scope and ambition.
After the now infamous events of 9/11 it quickly became clear to the U.S. government that the attacks on the WTC were the work of Al queda. Based on
the support of the Taliban regime of Al queda in Afghanistan the decision was made to take down the Afghani Taliban government and install a
government more in line with ours, which would as a result (hopefully) make the area a less fertile recruitment center for terrorist organisations. In
addition due to Pakistans support of the taliban regime and the diffuculty of direct millitary force beng applied in Pakistan (due in no smal part to
Pakistans possesion of Nuclear weapons) It was necessary to turn an enemy into an ally. This was accomplished by using the massive groundswell of
international support to allow the U.S. to apply pressure to Pakistans government to become more compliant with U.S. doctrine.
However the removal of the Talban regime alone would not be enough to ensure American security. The Middle East as a whole is hotbed of terrorist
sympathies and supporters. What was (and still is) needed to ensure the safety of the American populace was a fundamental change in the politics of
the region. The only way this can be done is through the elimination of the most dangerous regimes in the area. The greatest supporter of Islamic
extremist terrorism worldwide in recent historical time has been the nation of Iran. However moving into Iran directly from Afghanistan would have
been difficult from both a tactical and logistical pont of view. What was needed was a power base which could be used to allow a multifront attack on
Iran while at the same time improving the overall stabillity of the region as a whole.
The contiuned refusal of Saddam Hussein to comply with international weapon inspectors, as well as his rather well known tendacies torwards brutal
supression of disidents, coupled with his history of agressive invasions made Iraq a perfect target. The Intelligence that he was attempting to
procure weapons of mass destruction provided the rationale the Bush administration needed to begn the second stage of thier broader middle east
strategy. The other obvious advantage to regime change in Iraq was the vast oil reserves the country has coupled with the fact that the creaton of a
flashpoint in the region would (and has seemed to) draw a great deal of the terrorist who had been forced out of afghanistan by Coaltion forces into a
local area as opposed to them spreading into Europe and the United States. In addition the U.S presense in Iran allows the U.S. intelligence services
to more easily contact anti-government opposition in Iran. A further advantage has been placing Iran into the unenviable position of being surrounded
on two sides by potentially hostile forces. Iran's understanding of the tactically dangerous position they are in can be illustrated by thier support
in both an advisory and supply capacity of Al Sadr, and thier attempts to further destabilise the fledging Iraqi government. It seems that thier only
hope is to keep the Coalition forces in Iraq too busy to begin the next stage of what I believe to be the Bush adminstrations overall policy.
The history thus established I wish to make predictions based on my Hypothesis.
1) In order to progress to the next stage it will be necessary to transfer the burden of the security operation in Iraq and Afghanstan to either
international forces or local security forces. The Bush adminstration appears to be taking both courses of action, Askng for international support in
Afghansistan, while engaging in intensive training of and with the fledging Iraqi security agencies. We should begin to see a broader transfer of
duties from the U.S. to Iraqi forces, allthough if my hypothesis is correct we will not see a reducton of troops there. If we observe that the Iraqi
security forces begin to take over more and more duties from the U.S. led Coalition, while troop numbers remain static or increase it may be a proof
of the valdity of my hypothesis. By the same token If we see more international troops move into Afghanistan without a corresponding reduction in
troop numbers there, or a basing/concentration of those forces in areas whch border with Iran this may also be interperted as proof of the valdity of
2) In order for ths plan to progress it will be necessary for both Iraq and Afghnistan to hold elections and begn to truly self govern thier
populaces. It is interesting to note that allthough we invaded Afghanistan nearly 1 year prior to Iraq, both governments will be engaged in elections
at approximately the sme time.
3) After the elections in both countries I would expect to see a formal declartion of both governments becoming responsible for thier own security
concerns, probably entailing some ceremonial handover of responsibility coupled with the establishment of treaties creating permanent U.S. (not NATO
or U.N.) millitary bases in both countries most likely near the border of Iran in both instances.
4) Some time in the first six months of next year an incident with Iran will provide the rationale necessry for the Bush adminisration (or the kerry
adminstraton if elected) to begin an invasion of Iran (hopefully supported by antigovernment rebels within the country)
While many may consider this strategy to be unecessary, warlike, or imperialitic, the fact is that a stable middle east is vital to the national
security of the United States as well as the welfare of our economy, and though it will be brutal, bloody, and very difficult to establish a zone of
democracy in this region if we stick to this course the whole world will benefit from it in the long run.
Well thats my theroy now please share yours.