When the U.S. government attempts to justify the use of armed forces, such political justifications to U.S. citizens and Congress are positioned as a moral imperative or as a necessary defense due to national security. With respect to the current war in Iraq, both of these justifications were proffered by the Bush Administration. The former lacks logic and the latter is fiction with respect to the Iraq War. Despite the lack of validity of extending these justifications for waging war in Iraq, the war was still necessary. This is true as long as freedom and national security equate to product consumption and democratic prosperity is viewed in terms of economic growth. Such measures mandate warfare to achieve political and economic stability in areas where ever scarcer petroleum resources are significant. The U.S. military action during Operation Desert Shield was launched to secure Saudi Arabian oil fields.
Over the next three decades, world population will surpass 10 billion people. The largely extravagant standard of living of American citizens is sustainable only through securing and controlling the world’s increasingly diminishing natural resources. In order to achieve this condition, the use of U.S. military force is increasingly required. Such truths are indigestible at best and political suicide at worst. Former President Jimmy Carter tried to tell the truth to Americans about the necessary link between foreign policy, political and economic stability, and foreign resources. The public responded to Carter’s efforts in the following manner: Convenience, low-cost petroleum, and economic growth are more important to us than whoever must be invaded, killed or negotiated with in order to secure these wants. To my shame, you and a host of your similarly misguided and unintelligent friends continue to posit such demands upon the government. Public servants continue to be in the position of fulfilling such demands,...