It still has not dawned on the Bush White House, nor many supporters of the Iraq War, that despite whatever good intentions of the U.S. may have had in Iraq, that the U.S. only breeds its own continued opposition in the developing world by being viewed as an interventionist "colonialist" type power in the affairs of the Developing nations.
While modern terrorism is a complex problem for the Western world, it still represents a type of radical reaction by extremists against Western influence, and the U.S. only seems to breed more of it when it attempts to stomp it out. How to effectively counter it is a very difficult question. But it may be easier to understand what tends to fuel the problem.
Since 1961, as many as eight million persons have died in conflicts in Developing world nations as a direct result of U.S. military action, or by the use of U.S. backed surrogates with CIA support or other military backing by the U.S.
Vietnam was essentially a civil war to reunite the nation by Viet Minh Independence movement leader, Ho Chi Minh, a former U.S. ally during WWII, in which U.S. and Viet Minh fighters fought side by side to defeat the Japanese invaders. In the 1950's, the Viet Minh turned their actions against the French and finally the Americans during the 1960's when both Western nations sought to intervene and arrange Vietnam in their own design, rather than some self-design of the Vietnamese.
When the Berlin Wall fell in the late 80's, many in the world expected a new world order to take shape. But the Reagan administration quickly moved against Panama. Washington soon became politically involved in Albania and Bulgaria to replace those governments. Nicaragua became a CIA battleground for U.S. intervention to undermine another government Washington disliked. And there was eventual U.S. military action in Somalia. U.S. intervention in Yugoslavia later followed and finally the 2003 war in Iraq as well.
While many in the Developing world may tend to choose bad governments, and significant loss of human life or cruelty often results, the result of U.S. action in a state often only inspires a anti-U.S. reaction, and more anger in the Developing world. In Iraq, like a magnet, anti-U.S. elements from all over the Muslim world have been drawn to counter the U.S. role in that nation.
The problem is that the U.S. can always justify it's actions in some desolate land in the name of some "humanitarian" reason, when it is often the mineral assets of that nation that only make it really all that important to the U.S., and the persons whose lives are directly impacted in those nations only see the U.S. as acting just like the old time colonial regimes from Britain, Spain or France of the past.
In Iraq, so many nations are involved, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and the U.S. and Britain, that many persons there cannot help but feel that their nation is little more than some international political football. Many simply want all foreign nations out, fueling both domestic anger and a continued insurgency and terrorism. How to break this cycle is the difficult question.
Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!