1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

You're right on Oil

Reader comment on item: Op Eds Now More Central in War than Bullets
in response to reader comment: We destroy, we invade to finish the job, and we leave it for NATO

Submitted by Gary Cochran (United States), Oct 23, 2006 at 00:14

I'm very aware of eventualities in the world but my comment of "invading to finish the job" refers ONLY to completing the destruction of whatever tools of war a nation has to attack us. I was not referring to Bush's "mission accomplished", since I'm not sure what that mission was. I'm also not concerned about the creation of new enemies as a result of this destruction. Frankly, they are already our enemies and I believe in Caligula's motto for effective foreign policy - ODERINT DUM METUANT - "let them hate us, as long as they fear us."

My suggestion is to reconsider the mission of modern war, not to subjugate a nation and "make it a friend", but solely to destroy any capability of that nation from directly causing us harm with modern weapons or armies. What anyone does after that with respect to the conquered nation-state is no longer to be a concern of this nation. I never mentioned NATO, and I certainly have no confidence in the UN. Whether they agree with this concept or not is of no concern to me.

I'm not proposing this to the present situations in either Afghanistan or Iraq since we've already committed our reputation to new governments and leaders. I don't see how we can leave them in the lurch but we may not be able to save the situations without a major rethinking of our objectives.

My thought is to consider a new form of warfare to protect our nation and people without the commitment to rehabilitate or democratize the conquered people. No carrots, only sticks?

Vietnam had the objective of keeping North Vietnam from taking over the south; the old domino theory. Clearly this was a failure.

I agree that oil provides the basic source of funds for the majority of our enemies, but there is no reason to mix this issue with arms sales. That's just another problem humanity will never be able to solve. If we suddenly had an infinite supply of energy without oil, we wouldn't change a single Islamic teacher's religious viewpoint and that's the source of our danger; the religion of Islam.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to You're right on Oil by Gary Cochran

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2021 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)