FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

What’s Next?

 

The last 21 months certainly have been wild and crazy. We’ve seen the vaporization of the World Trade Center, a successful attack on the Pentagon, the transformation of George Bush from a bumbling laughing stock to an awe-inspiring tyrant, the overnight creation of a mammoth global peace movement, a lightning war of aggression and conquest by the U.S., and the simultaneous shattering of a half-century-old alliance and of the United Nations.

Now it’s time to look ahead at what may be coming, which could prove to be crazier and scarier still.

A lot, I suspect, will depend upon what America’s enemies decide to do next, and where they decide to act.

If Osama Bin Laden and his supporters decide to target the U.S. and manage to pull off another high-casualty terrorist attack within the United States, on the scale of what they did in Manhattan, it could spell the end of democratic government and of our civil liberties tradition. The growing backlash against the government’s post 9/11 assault on civil liberties, and the tentative questioning of the integrity and competence of the Bush administration that has begun more recently, would be swept away in a wave of new anti-terror fervor and Gestapo-like tactics that would be irresistible.

On the other hand, if the Iraqi resistance, with or without the help of outside organizations like al Qaeda, manages to move from isolated attacks on American soldiers in Iraq to a major massacre of American troops in that country, it could have a reverse effect back in the U.S., much like the Tet Offensive in the Indochina War–leading Americans to demand a pull-back from what will be widely viewed at that point as a hopeless quagmire. With the U.S. having kept its casualties so astonishingly low through the duration of the war, it might seem hard to imagine Iraq’s rag-tag guerrillas pulling off such a feat. Recall, however, that occupation is a lot different from invasion. An attacking army has all the advantages of mobility and surprise–and in America’s case, of massive aerial support. An army of occupation, in contrast, is a sitting duck, can make little use of air support, and moreover has to struggle against low morale, boredom and lack of attention. Moreover, the more aggressively the U.S. occupiers employ seek-and-destroy tactics against the Iraqi resistance, the more hostile they are likely to make the populace, thus creating an environment all the more favorable to the guerrillas.

It seems a safe bet that the Iraqi resistance and its allies throughout the Middle East are contemplating just such a major attack on American troops. They have to know that American public opinion has little patience for foreign adventures, that much of the occupying army is composed of reservists with families, jobs and lives that they want to get back to, and that heavy casualties are generally not politically tolerated. Thus, it seems only a matter of time before a Lebanon-style attack occurs.

What about a new major terror attack within the U.S.?

Sadly, it would seem such a terrible event is becoming increasingly likely, too. Even under the best of circumstances, the U.S. invasion of Iraq virtually assured that whatever experimental chemical or biological horrors Saddam Hussein might have been cooking up, plus the nuclear waste materials in Iraq, would find their way into the hands of terrorists. But beyond that, the incredible ineptness and disinterest demonstrated by the invading U.S. and British armed forces, which waited weeks to try to secure dangerous weapons and waste materials, handed such hostile groups a golden opportunity. Not only were the materials available–there was a broken enemy motivated to sell whatever it could, both to punish the U.S. and to raise cash to escape Iraq.

On top of that, beyond creating a ludicrous color-coded alarm system and arresting, terrorizing and deporting hundreds of hapless Islamic immigrant visa violators, it turns out that the Bush Administration has done almost nothing concrete to protect the U.S. against terrorism. The fraudulently promoted Iraq war was a huge diversion not just of attention, but of domestic security forces and financial resources. Whole state police and urban police departments, as well as fire departments, have been gutted, thanks to a legacy of programs which have encouraged people in those jobs to sign up as reservists or in the National Guard. Moreover, Rand Beers, the top Bush counter-terrorism advisor who resigned in disgust in March, says that the Bush administration has been “making us less secure, not more secure,” because of a pattern of neglect and homeland security budget cutting, for example in the area of port security or border security.

A conspiracy theorist could have a heyday speculating on whether it’s actually in the Bush administration’s interest to have the U.S. suffer an occasional terror hit. Certainly the current resident of the White House–whose claim to the title “President” has always been rather tenuous–was not winning any popularity contests until he was able to start calling himself Commander-in-Chief instead of Chief Executive. His whole reelection campaign appears to be premised upon his running dressed in khaki.

Whatever the White House’s real motives, we have the ironic situation of a military establishment resorting to all manner of aggressive actions in a desperate bid to avoid a calamitous attack on its troops in Iraq, and an administration at home offering , as Beers puts is, “only a rhetorical policy” for protection against a domestic terror attack.

The near certainty of large-scale bloody attacks on Americans both in Iraq and in the U.S. presents Democrats, liberals, progressives and the whole opposition movement with a dual challenge: to prepare now for both eventualities.

In the case of domestic terrorism, now is the time to forcefully remind Americans that terror attacks, however awful, do not in themselves threaten America’s existence; that it is, rather, the unthinking, panicky and jingoistic response to acts of terror–for example sweeping arrests, detentions without trial, hasty passage of laws like the USA PATRIOT Act, and the like–which pose the real threat. If the newsmedia, political leaders and other opinion makers make that argument powerfully and often now, before terror strikes again, it will be far easier to challenge the inevitable push towards a police state that will follow any major act of terror.

At the same time the peace movement needs to lay the groundwork now for a major campaign to recall American troops from Iraq, in order to be able to capitalize on the inevitable loss of support for the occupation that will follow any large-scale attack on American troops in that country.

Dave Lindorff is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. A collection of Lindorff’s stories can be found here: http://www.nwuphilly.org/dave.html

 

More articles by:

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of ThisCantBeHappening!, an online newspaper collective, and is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

July 16, 2018
Sheldon Richman
Trump Turns to Gaza as Middle East Deal of the Century Collapses
Charles Pierson
Kirstjen Nielsen Just Wants to Protect You
Brett Wilkins
The Lydda Death March and the Israeli State of Denial
Patrick Cockburn
Trump Knows That the US Can Exercise More Power in a UK Weakened by Brexit
Robert Fisk
The Fisherman of Sarajevo Told Tales Past Wars and Wars to Come
Gary Leupp
When Did Russia Become an Adversary?
Uri Avnery
“Not Enough!”
Dave Lindorff
Undermining Trump-Putin Summit Means Promoting War
Manuel E. Yepe
World Trade War Has Begun
Binoy Kampmark
Trump Stomps Britain
Wim Laven
The Best Deals are the Deals that Develop Peace
Kary Love
Can We Learn from Heinrich Himmler’s Daughter? Should We?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Franklin Lamb, Requiescat in Pace
Weekend Edition
July 13, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Brian Cloughley
Lessons That Should Have Been Learned From NATO’s Destruction of Libya
Paul Street
Time to Stop Playing “Simon Says” with James Madison and Alexander Hamilton
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: In the Land of Formula and Honey
Aidan O'Brien
Ireland’s Intellectuals Bow to the Queen of Chaos 
Michael Collins
The Affirmative Action Silo
Andrew Levine
Tipping Points
Geoff Dutton
Fair and Balanced Opinion at the New York Times
Ajamu Baraka
Cultural and Ideological Struggle in the US: a Final Comment on Ocasio-Cortez
David Rosen
The New McCarthyism: Is the Electric Chair Next for the Left?
Ken Levy
The McConnell Rule: Nasty, Brutish, and Unconstitutional
George Wuerthner
The Awful Truth About the Hammonds
Robert Fisk
Will Those Killed by NATO 19 Years Ago in Serbia Ever Get Justice?
Robert Hunziker
Three Climatic Monsters with Asteroid Impact
Ramzy Baroud
Europe’s Iron Curtain: The Refugee Crisis is about to Worsen
Nick Pemberton
A Letter For Scarlett JoManDaughter
Marilyn Garson
Netanyahu’s War on Transcendence 
Patrick Cockburn
Is ISIS About to Lose Its Last Stronghold in Syria?
Joseph Grosso
The Invisible Class: Workers in America
Kim Ives
Haiti’s Popular Uprising Calls for President Jovenel Moïse’s Removal
John Carroll Md
Dispatch From Haiti: Trump and Breastfeeding
Alycee Lane
On Heat Waves and Climate Resistance
Ed Meek
Dershowitz the Sophist
Howard Lisnoff
Liberal Massachusetts and Recreational Marijuana
Ike Nahem
Trump, Trade Wars, and the Class Struggle
Olivia Alperstein
Kavanaugh and the Supremes: It’s About Much More Than Abortion
Manuel E. Yepe
Korea After the Handshake
Robert Kosuth
Militarized Nationalism: Pernicious and Pervasive
Binoy Kampmark
Soft Brexits and Hard Realities: The Tory Revolt
Helena Norberg-Hodge
Localization: a Strategic Alternative to Globalized Authoritarianism
Kevin Zeese - Nils McCune
Correcting The Record: What Is Really Happening In Nicaragua?
Chris Wright
The American Oligarchy: A Review
Kweli Nzito
Imperial Gangster Nations: Peddling “Democracy” and Other Goodies to the Untutored
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail