US strategies in Iraq more dangerous than Snowden’s revelations

The decisions and actions of the United States in Iraq, have been more harmful for American troops than Edward Snowden’s revelations, a western media said. Juan Cole in an article on 'Informed Comments' said that during the World War II, the American public always heard that the communist party in the Soviet Union, contrary to the US government, believes that the aims justify the means. “Now they (US officials) are saying that the ends justify the means, even if the means are blatantly unconstitutional,” Cole underlined. “The latest salvo in this disinformation campaign is to claim that Snowden has endangered US troops by revealing surveillance methods. That allegation is highly unlikely to be true. The enemies of the US abroad knew very well of US surveillance capabilities.” He added that the real peril for American soldiers, came from the US strategies in Iraq. He counted five reasons for supporting his claim: 1. Going to war on false pretenses. The invasion and occupation of Iraq, which killed over 4000 troops, wounded over 30,000 badly, and inflicted some injuries on some 100,000, was sold on the incorrect allegation that Iraq was near to having a nuclear weapon and had deadly Weapons of Mass Destruction that it might use on the US. That case was false, and most likely an outright lie. You can’t endanger US troops in a more thorough way than by sending them into a dangerous country based on false allegations. 2. Going to war in the teeth of international law. The Bush administration was not authorized to attack Iraq by the UN Security Council. Under the UN charter, one country may attack another only in self-defense or as a result of a call for the use of force by the UNSC. 3. Extending tours from 6 months to 18 months and making troops do 3 and 4 tours. Before the Iraq War the exposure of soldiers to the deadliest situations in war was somewhat limited. Because of the relatively small professional army, the Bush administration over-used the troops. 4. Trying to militarily occupy large, rugged Muslim countries. After the horrors of the age of colonialism, Muslim populations are touchy about white people tramping around their country in army boots and ordering them around. Where they can’t forestall such neo-colonialism politically, they turn to guerrilla war to get rid of the invading troops. Former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates said that anyone contemplating another Asian land war should “have his head examined”. 5. Sending troops into dangerous situations, including exposing them to improvised explosive devices (IEDs), without the proper equipment. When challenged on the need for armored shields for military vehicles in a bomb-rich environment, then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “you go to war with the army you have.” But Rumsfeld didn’t need to go to war at all, and had plenty of time to plan for procurement of needed equipment (or could have made time if he hadn’t been in such a hurry to get to Baghdad). He concluded that those officials who really made these fatal decisions are the ones that should be blamed for the death of thousands of soldiers in fruitless wars. “That is why Snowden’s revelations, in potentially allowing us to have an informed public discussion of the issue, are the service of a whistleblower to the public. And they may well end up protecting our troops from the rash decisions or unfounded of chicken hawk politicians,” Cole said.