The New York Times’s “liberal” argument for colonial occupation

[Karmadillo]

On Edit: Please note sierra_moon's post below (#1). Kristof apparently writes independently of the NY Times editorial board. Headline is the one the WSWS used.

We will give you love, but you must let us rape you first.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/oct2003/nyt-o17.shtml

<edit>

This line of argumentation raises one rather obvious question. Is there no connection between what Kristof characterizes as the “height of hubris”—what could be described more bluntly as a war crime —in invading Iraq, and the goals that are being pursued through the ongoing occupation and military action?

In an earlier period, anti-communist liberals like the Times columnist would routinely condemn socialism from the standpoint that the “end” of social equality could never justify the “means” of social revolution. No such high-sounding moral qualms are raised, however, about the supposed ends of “democracy,” “peace” and “development” in Iraq being realized through the killing and maiming of tens of thousands of people, all carried out on the basis of lies and in defiance of international law.

When it is a question of crimes carried out to defend the interests of the ruling elite, it is, to borrow Kristof’s unfortunate phrase, merely a matter of “holding our noses”—presumably to keep out the stench of so many corpses.

In reality, criminal means are employed for the realization of criminal ends. The US war and occupation of Iraq are no exception. The lies about WMD and “terrorism” were designed to mask the real aims of those in the Bush administration who coldly planned this war as an act of conquest and plunder. The principal objectives have from the beginning been the establishment of US control over Iraq’s oil wealth and the securing of hegemony in an area of the world that is strategically vital to the interests of US imperialism.

The conquest of Iraq, moreover, is conceived of as only the initial step in an agenda of global war and plunder.

As for the $87 billion, there is ample evidence that the demand for this vast sum is part of a venal money-making scheme by those who control the levers of power in Washington. Kristof himself points to a request for $50 million to build a cement factory that Iraqis proved capable of constructing for $80,000, and cites doubts within the American public about the allotment of $50,000 apiece for the purchase of garbage trucks.

more...

[baby_bear]

1. For the record, it's not just the NYTimes

That is, Kristof writes his column independent of the NYTimes editorial board.

However, the editorial board did its part to pump up the WMD lie, that's for sure.

Good post. Thanks.

s_m

[Woodstock]

2. the "let's make the best of things" attitude that borders on apologism

These guys are going to get stars on their report card for deportment, but lose the election if they keep it up. Can you imagine the Republicans being so damned nice if they weren't getting their way? If they were forced to make lemonade out of the Democrats' lemons? No way. If they feel staying around a little longer is making the best of things (and I'm not sure I agree abrupt withdrawal is the right thing), then forget the flowering language - SCREAM about the mess they made, make it clear we're cleaning up their mess.