Since 9/11, We've Had 4 Wars in the Middle East. They've All Been Disasters.

[Karmadillo]

But fifth time's the charm, right?

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/02/911-weve-had-four-wars-middle-east-theyve-all-been-disasters

Since 9/11, We've Had 4 Wars in the Middle East. They've All Been Disasters.
—By Kevin Drum| Tue Feb. 17, 2015 3:40 PM EST



So here's my scorecard for American military interventions since 2000:

Afghanistan: A disaster. It's arguable that Afghanistan is no worse off than it was in 2001, but after losing thousands of American lives and spending a trillion American dollars, it's no better off either.

Iraq: An even bigger disaster. Saddam Hussein was a uniquely vicious dictator, but even at that there's not much question that Iraq is worse off than it was in 2003. We got rid of Saddam, but got a dysfunctional sectarian government and ISIS in return.

Libya: Another disaster. We got rid of Muammar Qaddafi, but got a Somalia-level failed state in return.

Yemen: Yet another disaster. After years of drone warfare, Houthi rebels have taken over the government. This appears to be simultaneously a win for Iran, which backs the rebels, and al-Qaeda, which may benefit from the resulting chaos. That's quite a twofer.

Blame all this on whoever you want. George Bush for starting two wars with no real plan to prosecute either one properly. Or Barack Obama for withdrawing from Iraq too soon and failing to have any kind of postwar plan for Libya. Whatever. The question for hawks at this point is: what makes you think American military force has even the slightest chance of improving things in the Middle East? It's been nothing but disasters since 9/11, and there's no reason at all to think we've learned how to do things better in the intervening years. Bush started big wars, and Obama has started small ones, but the result has been the same.

more...

[bigwillq]

1. The US just needs to cut it losses and get out of the ME.

For good. The US is doing more harm than good, imo.

[polly7]

2. War is a Racket

[woo me with science]

4. +1000000

[hifiguy]

6. polly, you need to make this an OP

No one ever got it more right than General Butler, not even Ike warning us about the MIC.

[polly7]

8. LOL My OP's don't turn out so well usually, I have my 'followers',

but please do, if you think it would be a good OP.

[Karmadillo]

11. Maybe they haven't been a disaster. They directed the "peace dividend" away

from wasteful spending on education, healthcare, housing, and infrastructure. Most importantly, the endless warfare has kept the masses from getting the wrong sort of idea about what government can and should achieve. As Orwell notes:

http://www.panarchy.org/orwell/war.1949.html

The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent...The war, therefore, if we judge it by the standards of previous wars, is merely an imposture. It is like the battles between certain ruminant animals whose horns are set at such an angle that they are incapable of hurting one another. But though it is unreal it is not meaningless. It eats up the surplus of consumable goods, and it helps to preserve the special mental atmosphere that a hierarchical society needs. War, it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair. In the past, the ruling groups of all countries, although they might recognize their common interest and therefore limit the destructiveness of war, did fight against one another, and the victor always plundered the vanquished. In our own day they are not fighting against one another at all. The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact.

So maybe these wars with their trillions in costs are features of the system, not bugs.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men (and, Neocons/Neolibs) Gang aft agley Robert Burns

[hifiguy]

5. The classic definition of insanity is

doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.

The only entity that has benefited from this in any way are the 'defense' contractors. They have made billions upon billions.

"War is a racket." USMC General Smedley Butler

[jakeXT]

7. They had lot of time to integrate all the NATO members,as a side effect kicking out Russia and China

from investing in Libya and Iraq.

"NATO in Afghanistan: Turning Retreat into Victory"

...

SECURITY AND DEMOCRACY

Afghanistan forced NATO to undergo a long adaptive process to be able to operate in an unprecedented and harsh strategic theater. It differed fundamentally from NATO's previous peacekeeping missions in the Balkans because the traditional division of labor between civilian and military efforts could not be maintained in practice.

http://belfercenter.hks.harvard.edu/publication/23770/nato_in_afghanistan.html?breadcrumb=%2Fpublication%2F24962%2Fpakistan_india_and_china_after_the_us_drawdown_from_afghanistan

[johnnyreb]

9. The Yanks are comin'!

"There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but, boys, it is all hell." —Yankee General William Tecumseh Sherman, April 11, 1880

[NutmegYankee]

10. Wait, Libya is in the Middle East?

And this whole time I thought that was North Africa.

[jakeXT]

12. So is Egypt, but Afghanistan isn't in the Middle East either

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East