AMERICA’S resolve to kill Iraqi president Saddam Hussain can be compared with the resolve to killing a sparrow with a canon. I mean, can you believe that just to kill one person, the superpower of the world, with the support of some 35 of its global allies, has engaged hundreds of thousands of their regular troops, thousands of missiles, bombers and other fighter planes with four aircraft carriers. It has spent billions of dollars and spending even more just to kill one person?
Of course, in this war, the superpower will be successful either after killing Saddam Hussain or without killing him. But this reminds me of a joke when some people were trying to kill mosquitoes with fire-arms. After sometime they declared success because they sustained only two casualties, compared to ten casualties of the enemy.
If Saddam Hussain was the only target, then like mosquitoes which could have been killed using other well-known means saving their two casualties, the superpower could have killed Saddam using other simpler tactics which it has been using earlier successfully in different parts of the world. If this time this simpler tactics was not preferred and a full-quorum show of war was staged, then there have been some specific reasons behind it.
This is not the first time when this show has been staged. This is the repetition of a show which was staged one-and-a-half years ago in Afghanistan. Apparently at that time there were only two persons, Osama Bin Laden and Mulla Omar, as targets, and to get these two persons dead or alive, a show like the present one was carried out.
At the time Afghanistan was not even as strong as Iraq is now. But to achieve the goal a full stage war show was considered necessary. Hundreds of thousands of tons of ammunition was used, billions of dollars were spent and large number of casualties were afforded apparently without success as both the enemies of the superpower remain at large and presumed alive. Can anyone believe that the said superpower, with all of its resources, has been unsuccessful in killing just two people in Afghanistan?
It will be interesting to mention here, the role of the top intelligence agencies of the superpower. One of these agencies has the biggest worldwide network with all possible resources available to it. It has an approved budget amounting to many times the budget of our country. This network is so big that you can always suspect one of your friends or acquaintance as its regular or inadvertent agent. Can you believe that this powerful intelligence agency has not been successful in locating Bin Laden and/or Mulla Omar in one-and-a-half years?
Can you also believe that these super intelligence agencies were unable to get any information of the plot of destroying the World Trade Towers specially when, as it is alleged, this plot was known to hundreds of Jewish employees of those Towers? These inept agencies ought to be disbanded, just for the reason that they have brought bad name on the destruction of the Twin Towers, and have forced the superpower to take military action in Afghanistan and Iraq rather than to locate the whereabouts of Bin Laden, Mulla Omar and Saddam Hussain and deal with them quietly and suitably in order to avoid two wars.
When the performance of these agencies is compared with one of our newsman, who was able to locate Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan and was able to record an interview, subsequently published in our newspapers, then one wonders why this newsman was not picked up by the superpower to head one of its intelligence agencies to get bin Laden preferably alive and avoid war in Afghanistan?
If our superpower has been unsuccessful in killing Bin Laden and Mulla Omar even after staging war in Afghanistan, then it can easily be suspected that they will again be unsuccessful in killing Saddam Hussain. So, if Saddam gets away, then the superpower fails in its objective. That is if that was the objective.
Frankly speaking, there isn’t a common consensus as to what the objective of this whole war is. Some say that it is to capture the oil wells of Iraq. That may not be right. And to support the argument that oil is not the objective, at least in this war, here are a few observations.
Since the World War II, the forces of our superpower have been present in Western Europe. Gradually and quietly these forces have been moving into Eastern Europe under the guise of treaties or other excuses. In 1991 these forces entered Saudi Arabia on the excuse of the Iraq-Kuwait war. In 2001 these forces entered Afghanistan for the protection of Afghans from Taliban. And now they have entered Iraq for the protection of the Iraqi population from Saddam Hussain.
When USSR invaded Afghanistan, it did not care about the proper way and suffered heavy losses. Its defeat in Afghanistan brought a bad name and instability to it. Inability to do things in the proper way, remind me of a story, related to the partition of the Indo-Pak subcontinent.
When leaders of India went to England for talks on the partition of India, the King of England arranged a dinner in their honour. The dinner was served in gold plated crockery. One of the Indian leaders, “A”, escaping the sights of others, put one golden spoon into his pocket. Unluckily for him, another leader “B” saw him stealing the spoon.
After the dinner leader “B” asked the King to allow him to show one of many tricks which he knew. When allowed, he picked up another golden spoon from the table, showed it to all in attendance and said that he would put that golden spoon in his pocket which would come out from the pocket of another person. Thus the spoon was recovered from the pocket of leader “A”. Everybody enjoyed the trick and clapped happily. While going back the leader “B” told leader “A” that I did the same thing that you did, but there has to be a proper way of doing the things.
