Noble or Imperial

First, a hat tip goes to Little Green Footballs for spotting this commentary in a local trendy Berkeley online newspaper.

There are several schools of thought about the Iraq War. The first is exemplified by John McCain which believes that not only was the Iraq War moral and noble, but that it is winnable and vital. The second school of thought is held by much of the mainstream Democratic party that says that the Iraq war was well meaning but utterly misguided and an exercise in futility. It is an exercise that needs to be ended ASAP to limit the damage as much as possible. The two schools differ on effectiveness but neither questions the motives. There is a third school that goes so far as to question the motives. This school of thought believes that the Iraq war was an endeavor in greed and imperialism and it even goes so far as to put this war into the context of a pattern of both. This particular commentary is in this third category...

In the recent political battle around the Marine recruiting station in Berkeley there has been much confusion around the concept or slogan of “supporting the troops,” but opposing the unjust wars of the Bush regime. Many who oppose the Bush regime wars also say they “support the troops.” Let me say it straight out—I do not support the troops and neither should you. It is objectively impossible to support the troops of the imperialist military forces of the U.S. and at the same time oppose the wars in which they fight.

The United States has over 700 military bases or sites located in over 130 foreign countries. The hundreds of thousands of troops stationed in these countries are not there to preserve or foster freedom and democracy as the Bush regime would like to claim, but to maintain U.S. imperialist domination of the world. The United States now spends more on its military than all the other nations of the world combined.

If you “support the troops” in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the other more than 100 countries in which they are located, you also objectively support U.S. hegemony in the world. I believe that the vast majority of people who say they support the troops do not wish to support U.S. imperialism, but that is what they are really doing by putting forth the slogan of “support the troops.”

There are several things here. Each party and ideology has their extremists, and those extremists hurt the party and ideology as a whole. On the left, it is folks like these. It is one thing to question the wisdom and execution of our war effort, and it is quite another to question its motives. Americans aren't all together happy with the Iraq War, however they don't believe that America is a bad nation. Furthermore, they are proud and fully behind the troops executing this war.

Second, there are many in this far left circle that try to paint their opposition as strictly anti Bush. Many, like me, believe that this is not so. In fact, we believe that most of these folks are flat out anti American, and now we finally have one person that admits it. He isn't merely against the Iraq war but the American war machine. Whatever anti Bush rhetoric he has, it is nothing more than a red herring for his real anti American feelings...

The United States has over 700 military bases or sites located in over 130 foreign countries. The hundreds of thousands of troops stationed in these countries are not there to preserve or foster freedom and democracy as the Bush regime would like to claim, but to maintain U.S. imperialist domination of the world. The United States now spends more on its military than all the other nations of the world combined.

Whether or not his hypothesis is true, these troops have been there a lot longer than Bush has been in office. If they are really doing imperialistic work it is a function of American policy not Bush policy.

Third, and most importantly, is the absurdity of the claim. American blood and treasure is responsible for bringing peace to Europe. It is responsible for keeping South Korea free. It is responsible for keeping Kuwait free. Now, most recently, millions of people in both Afghanistan and Iraq have a chance at freedom at the costly expense of American blood and treasure. These bases that the author believes are meant for imperialist purposes are stationed in places like Germany, Italy, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia. All of the bases were created and maintained with the approval and cooperation of the host country. The bases in Europe were created and maintained to protect Western Europe from the aggression of the Soviet Bloc. In South Korea, they were created and maintained to protect South Korea from North Korean aggression. In Saudi Arabia, the bases were created to protect the Saudis from Saddam.

Finally, even if the author was right, that still gives him no moral authority not to support the troops. Troops don't make policy. They are the instrument of policy. Bad policy is the responsibility of the policy makers. If troops are sent in on a mission that is entirely imperialistic then shame on those that sent them there. The troops can still act valiantly and full of courage. The current crop of troops are the finest in the world, and they have set an example for the rest of us for courage, professionalism and mental toughness. Whatever you think of the policy, the troops have behaved as a shining example for everyone.