Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by roenxi 149 days ago
> - Even policymakers who have publicly admitted that Iraq was a massive intelligence and political failure all agree that regional stability was always the main goal.

And in their spare time they pretend to sell bridges to people? Nobody sane would believe that invading a country promotes regional stability. The idea is absurdist, the point of invading a country is destabilising it and disrupting any power that the locals might have. Forcefully toppling governments and killing large numbers of people has never been a credible path to stability.
2 comments
glompers 148 days ago
The Assad dictatorships in Syria and the Hussein regime in Iraq were proponents of Baathism. The former had occupied Lebanon and invaded Israel while the latter had invaded Iran in 1980 and annexed Kuwait in 1990.
link
datsci_est_2015 148 days ago
> Nobody sane would believe that invading a country promotes regional stability.

Then you should read about some of the biggest influencers in US foreign policy since WW2. There’s one guy whose entire career was spent essentially trying to convince the president / military brass to bomb enemies into submission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay

I’m sure you’ve also heard of Henry Kissinger.

Anyway, pretty strong history of US political figures dehumanizing foreign populations, justified by some western moral superiority. Direct through line to the Bush presidency (last of the neoconservatives).

link
roenxi 148 days ago
Are you suggesting that LeMay or Kissinger believed that invasions promoted regional stability? On what basis? When Kissenger wanted stability he famously promoted détente with Russia and negotiating with the Chinese.

Kissinger did a lot of evil stuff, but a big part of his thinking was when he wanted an area wrecked he sent in an army, and when he wanted stability he negotiated.

link
datsci_est_2015 147 days ago
Nah more that there’s plenty of history of influential American policymakers being convinced of a certain strategy’s effectiveness only to be proven wrong by history and in the process completely obliterating peoples and countries.
link