Obey US and Swallow Your Medicine!

General Jay Tries to Cram Democracy Down Iraq’s Throat

VERBATUMS of General/Doctor Jay, the man who has been appointed to be the de facto ruler of Iraq by Paul Wolfowitz who was appointed by Donald Rumsfield who was appointed by George Bush who became President of our Democracy as a result of legal decisions made in Florida under the guidance of the President’s own younger brother, Governor Jeb Bush.

    The man who was hand picked for the sensitive and delicate position of bringing healing and Democracy to the devastated people of Iraq has made some public comments which we can use to evaluate his personal appropriateness for this sensitive and historic task.

Three Verbatims of General Jay

1.   “A majority of the people realize we’re only going to stay here long enough to start a democratic government for them” – C.S. Monitor April 16, 2003

2.   “[Vietnam] took too long… If President Bush had been President, we would have won.” Time – April 28, 2003

3.   “What better place than the birthplace of civilization could you have for the beginning of a free Iraq?” C.S. Monitor, April 16, 2003

Verbatim #1 of General Jay – The Man Chosen to Introduce Democracy to a Nation

“A Majority of the people realize we’re only going to stay here long enough to start a democratic government for them.”

In verbatim #1, the words, “We are going to stay here long enough to start a democratic government for them,” are some quite scary words. It is obvious that General Jay feels some rejection from some Iraqi people for him to place such emphasis on Americans being out of Iraq as soon as possible. It is also apparent from the next General Jay quote, that time is of the essence with this man who apparently has the patience and cultural sensitivity of the World War II hero, General George Patton.

Apart form the speed mentioned in General Jay’s quote, is his emphasis on where the hurried democracy is going to come from. According to his words, the Americans are going to start the democracy for the Iraqis. I would like to hear Andy Rooney of “Sixty Minutes” fame, explain how one powerful country starts a democracy for a weaker country where probably a majority of the people of that occupied country do not want a democracy. Or if they do want a democracy, they want to be certain that their favorite enemies in their own country are prevented form having their people elected to office. But it is fairly certain that when General Jay does things “Jay’s Way, “ he does not have in mind a democracy built on President Abraham Lincoln’s final eloquent words in his famous Getysburgh Address:

“A Government of the people, by the people for the people shall not perish from this earth.”

The last sentence of General Jay Garner’s “Iraqsburgh Address” on which he will hope to build democracy in Iraq, will probably be somewhat less eloquent, more pragmatic and possible Machiavellian.

The Final words of General Jay’s Iraqsburgh Address (The words are only slightly borrowed from his more idealistic predecessor, President Lincoln)

“A government of the White House with some Iraqi participation, by the White House, for the White House, shall not perish from Iraq as long as our oil driven economy is dependent on this region’s oil.”

Verbatim #2 of General Jay – The Man Chosen to Bring Healing and Restoration to a Nation

“[Vietnam] took too long… If President Bush had been President, we would have won.”

We will examine a few of the implications that the attitudes which are evident in this quote, have for Iraq. General Jay’s second quote seems to express how inefficient and apparently soft U.S. Presidents wasted precious time while they were not crushing Vietnam. The implication from his statement is that it would have been so much better for both the devastated Vietnamese and the frustrated U.S., if an assertive and wise George W. Bush would have conducted the war against the Vietnamese people instead of the soft Lynden Johnson and the tender Dick Nixon. After he victoriously crushed the Vietnamese people, of course Mr. Bush could have then appointed someone like culturally sensitive General Jay to expertly guide the crushed Vietnamese to an American orchestrated democracy.

General Jay’s concise quote captures the prevailing opinion of many military leaders that the U.S. could have “won” (Whatever “won” means?) the war if those two gentle Presidents, Johnson and Nixon would have allowed the American led “coalition” to kill more Vietnamese faster and more efficiently. (Wasn’t it as much a coalition against the Vietnamese as the pretend coalition that there has been against Iraq?) So we will briefly pursue General Jay’s line of reasoning regarding the importance of a superpower quickly crushing its victim in an unjust war.

If President George W. had fulfilled General Jay’s wish by being the Vietnamese War President, this “win at all cost” General Jay would have encouraged President “kill em fast” Bush to have used more than Agent Orange against the resistant Vietnamese in order to kill more military and more civilians more quickly. He would have suggested that he would have used chemical poisonous agents of every color in the rainbow against them. Then, as a result of the American technological advantage and superior efficiency at the art of killing, the Americans would have had one potentially difficult task made easier. They would have had less difficulty orchestrating a “democracy” because there would have been so many fewer Vietnamese to democratize.

One reality of the General Jay reasoning comes across as especially frightening. The shocking revelations of the Pentagon papers reveal that an extreme number of civilians were killed in Vietnam even though American goals were not accomplished under the leadership of gentle President Johnson and gentler President Nixon. Despite this ugly reality of so many destroyed civilians, General Jay has the viciousness to suggest that it would have been better if “Shoot em up” President Bush would have been an improvement. It is relatively obvious that the self-righteous Bush would have most certainly slaughtered even more innocent civilians to bring about a quicker victorious liberation of the Vietnamese people in order to pave the way for an American orchestrated democracy. It is exceptionally sad that General Jay still resents the fact that in light of the horrible revelations of the Pentagon Papers, the American public forced a humanitarian discontinuance of the awful killing. General Jay’s continued resentment of this stop to the slaughter is an exceptionally negative omen regarding his chance of success in bringing healing to a severely wounded Iraq.

The image I get of the “Jay way” of imposing democracy on a diverse and often-reluctant Iraqi people would be a scenario similar to the following:

Picture a frustrated and stressed out mother who is entirely convinced that she is the only one who knows what is best for the partially sick child of her neighbor. So without her neighbor’s permission for her to be the one to heal her neighbor’s child, this is what she does.

She orders her own children (U.S. Forces) to hold the neighbor child (Iraq) down on the ground. Then, she (Doctor/General Jay) orders her children to force open the mouth of the reluctant child. Next, as the child kicks, screams, resists, chokes and coughs, the proud self-assured mother forces a strange tasting dose of democracy medicine down the child’s throat. Then the mother orders her own obedient but bewildered children to stand the unsteady child on its feet while the mother shouts in the child’s ears.

“If you don’t try your d…well best to get rid of your sickness, I will force some different medicine down your throat that will make you awful sorry that you didn’t try a whole lot harder to get well.”

Whether the child vomits up the medicine, makes a marvelous recovery or convinces its own mother to unite their other neighbors so that they can force the intruding mother to take her medicine and get the “H” out of their neighborhood, are all possibilities.

Verbatum#3 – of General Jay – The General chosen to Introduce Freedom to a Nation

“What better place (at a U.S. Occupied Military Air Base) than the birthplace of civilization could you have for the beginning of a free Iraq?”

It must be acknowledged that this third quote leaves some room for optimism that the first two quotes definitely did not. However, the context of this third quote puts its sincerity under strong suspicion. General Jay made this comment when he was opening an U.S. sponsored forum that was held at an U.S. occupied former Iraqi airbase. The purpose of the gathering was to discuss potential plans for Democracy in Iraq. In order to attempt to get off to a positive start, only certain hand picked representatives form diverse Iraqi factions were allowed to be present. (Is there any possibility that all of the threatening symbolism of the forum taking place at an American Occupied military Air Base which now represented American military might, helped motivate the participants to want to appear to the Americans as being cooperative?)

It is noteworthy that about one hundred fifty want-to-be participants, though many were dressed in suits and ties and some had traveled hundred of miles hoping to be part of the discussion, were prevented from attending. Coils of barbwire were used as barricades to discourage their participation. (Please see C.S. Monitor – April 16, 2003.)

Even though we give the benefit of the doubt to the culturally sensitive General Jay, we are forced to acknowledge a potential credibility gap. There exists a giant chasm between General Jay using the beautiful words, “the beginnings of a free Iraq” and him actually demonstrating the attitude and instituting the policies that will truly make Iraq free of U.S. manipulation and exploitation. In view of his typical American arrogance that is so evident in General Jay’s first two quotations, it strongly appears that to hope for that the gentle General to sincerely have the true interests of the Iraqi people at heart, is to be in denial about the undeniable. He is definitely the wrong general in the wrong place at the wrong time.

For the U.S. government, for Arab governments, and for governments from all over the world to deny the reality that this particular general is a totally inappropriate choice to be the person to accomplish this delicate and significant task is a denial that must be challenged. There must be a united outcry against this vacuum of appropriate leadership in Iraq. If not, it will be a shame on contemporary civilization. It will be even more of a shame than the shame that Senator Robert Byrd publicly and eloquently heaped upon the U.S. Senate when elected senators in an American Democracy stayed silent about the pre-emptive war because they did not want to lose votes. The wise but disillusioned Senator Byrd’s courageous were:

“On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war. Yet, this chamber is, for the most part silent – ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.” The U.S. Senate, February 17, 2003 as quoted in C.S. Monitor February 25, 2003

The U.S. Senate, for the most part, continued to remain shamefully silent about serious questioning of the rush to crush Iraq. This rush put in serious jeopardy the entire international system of checks and balances regarding war against a nation under very questionable circumstances. Ominously, it put into question the future of U.S. relations with other nations. Though other nations did agree that horrendous human right abuses were occurring in Iraq, there existed strong conviction that there were other ways to deal with those abuses other than all out war. But the U.S. Senate remained almost unitedly silent on these monumental issues.

Now, will especially the Arab and Muslim Communities remain just as shamefully silent about the destructive and counter productive attitude of the U.S. General who has been hand picked to be in charge of the hoped for “Healing occupation” of Iraq?

Or, will the process of the democratization of Iraq actually become a colonization process with united voices not being raised in vigorous protest? After all, protecting against the known will of the mighty U.S. does have a cost connected with it. But there is another reality which balances the negative potential retribution against any person or nation who dares to question anything the U.S. decides that is in its own self interest to do. ALLAH most certainly makes His Goodness known to those who struggle against evil principalities and powers which pervert the ideal of justice for all. Also, there is nothing more satisfying to faithful servants of ALLAH than to know that their consciences are clear because they have tried their best to do what is pleasing to Him.

(Special note: On the day this paper was completed, two new appointment were announced by President Bush to positions of high authority in the “temporary” Iraq occupation. However, I do not think that those appointment which slightly lessen the authority of General Jay, negate my main points that it was exceptionally bad judgement to have appointed him in the first place.)