That's the phrase the Bush Administration has consistently used to characterise Iraq's resistance. According to their public statements, the Iraqi insurgency was predominantly led by non-Iraqis, professional terrorists there to cause trouble, aided by a motley crew of criminals and "dead-enders". And it was absolutely not a local reaction to occupation, or a grassroots resistance movement.
Unfortunately, that characterisation was complete bullshit:
U.S. intelligence agencies repeatedly warned the White House beginning more than two years ago that the insurgency in Iraq had deep local roots, was likely to worsen and could lead to civil war, according to former senior intelligence officials who helped craft the reports.Among the warnings, Knight Ridder has learned, was a major study, called a National Intelligence Estimate, completed in October 2003 that concluded that the insurgency was fueled by local conditions - not foreign terrorists- and drew strength from deep grievances, including the presence of U.S. troops.
Of course, this wasn't what Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld wanted to hear, and so these inconvenient facts were ignored in favour of a fantasy land of "foreign fighters" and an insurgency perpetually in its "last throes". Policy was made based on this fantasy - and people have died as a result. Yet another example of the faith-based presidency in action...
I've often thought there's something quasi-religious about the office of President of the United States, at least in recent years. Pronouncements by presidents, like those of popes and ayatollahs, are accepted uncritically by legions of the faithful, no matter how preposterous or divorced from the facts. Being uncritical about these pronouncements is seen as virtuous. By the same token, expressing scepticism or doubt shows a contemptible lack of faith (sinful, un-american). This might also explain why Americans often get so indignant when their president is criticised or ridiculed. Imagine similar reactions from NZers wrt Helen Clark.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry NRT but this really has not been news right from the outset. Any fool knows that any successful resistance absolutely depends on support, whether active or passive, from the local people. If it were otherwise, then the resistance could not move, hide, rest, re-supply...do ANYTHING without risk of being reported to the occupiers. This is absolutely fundamental.
ReplyDeleteWhat it does reflect is the general American public's willingness to delude itself.
What it does reflect is the general American public's willingness to delude itself.
ReplyDeleteSurely the Bush Administration's willingness to delude them is a rather important factor here as well?
Or does their constant repitition of "foreign fights... WMDs... foreign fighters... Saddam in bed with bib Laden" have nothing at all to do with the rather strange beliefs Americans have formed about Iraq?