Military Review

"The true causes of war"

44
"The true causes of war"
Ten years ago, the United States finally completed what they had launched a decade ago - Iraq killed Saddam Hussein. And naturally, it was the Americans who were interested in imposing their own view of this war on the world. Everything suited them: accusations of war for oil, and charges of genocide, and accusations of violating international law, and even outright deception about chemical weapons Saddam Hussein. They were interested only in the fact that the true causes of the war were never voiced, at least in full.


Let's try to fill this gap. The United States, unlike so many countries and peoples, has the unique ability to learn from its own and others' mistakes. This, it should be noted, is a very valuable and necessary quality. The USA, with incredible difficulty and rather randomly defeating its main geopolitical opponent of the 20th century of the USSR, learned the main lesson. Any large and resource-rich country is capable of short historical deadline to make a modernization spurt and become a threat to US plans for world hegemony. Twice the States missed this point - in the case of the USSR of the 30s and in the case of China of the nineties.

For a modernization breakthrough, a number of conditions are required - this includes the availability of resources (natural, human, technological, industrial, informational, etc.), the ability of the state to mobilize the population and these resources, the presence of a modernization ideology.

The Middle East has come too close to the line beyond which one of the countries in the region could “shoot”. Actually, one has already “fired” - Iran. Over the thirty years since the 79 revolution, Iran has managed to fulfill all of these conditions and make a serious breakthrough. Shahsky Iran, it is worth noting, was also on this path, but after modernization, it completely became controlled by Western corporations, which this very technological breakthrough in Iran created. The ayatollahs did the same, but relying on their own strength. And they won.

However, the Iranian experience is not applicable to the rest of the Middle East countries - and not only because Iran is Shiites. In Iran, the imperial nationalist ideology is traditionally strong, drawing on the real historical experience of Persia’s millennial imperial past. The fusion of this ideology with Islam created the ideology that mobilized the nation, which managed to break through the blockade and the embargo.

For the Wahhabi monarchies of the Arabian Peninsula, the United States was and remains completely calm - professing a fundamental Islam that does not tolerate innovations, monarchs are not able to modernize and withdraw their countries from the hydrocarbon dead end in which they are staying. They are objectively dependent on external conditions, and therefore already do not pose the slightest threat to US interests.

However, the secular regimes in the Middle East have shown that Sunni countries are also capable of modernization, moreover, swift and successful. Each of these countries - Egypt, Syria, Libya, Algeria - had and still has insurmountable difficulties that do not allow them to use the experience of Iran. However, potentially it was on the path of secular development — and no more — that they managed to achieve very serious successes in a relatively short time.

It is not surprising that the Arab Spring, under the slogans of which the archaic and fundamental clericalism descends to the Middle East, has become desirable for the United States and was largely designed by them. It is precisely wild cave Islam that can completely and forever discard this region in development, eliminate the danger of modernization and, ultimately, a threat to the position of the United States. That is why the United States is utterly fierce to smash Syria and defeat Iraq - simply because in these countries a society was created in which Islam gave way to secular development, a new and in many ways fundamentally different ideology of coexistence of different peoples, religions and social groups was created. Iraq was on the first place in the list of targets for destruction, since Saddam Hussein, in addition to creating an ideological base and mobilization opportunities for a breakthrough, also had enormous raw material resources. It was they who could become the financial base of modernization in Iraq, and that is why the first and most important attack was directed at him.

In fact, if we hit on a fierce alternative, without two Iraqi wars, today we would have two powerful industrial states of the Middle East - Iraq and Iran, which were the leaders for the whole region. Perhaps we would already see integration processes gathering the region into a huge conglomerate of different, but going to the same goal of states. A certain Islamic Union, in which, as in the European Union, everything would be held in two leading states.

And it is precisely this development option that was categorically unacceptable for the United States. Actually, that's why they rolled Iraq into small rubble.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.vz.ru
44 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. predator.3
    predator.3 21 March 2013 11: 11 New
    +3
    "The true causes of war"

    Resource control, in the case of Iraq, is oil reserves!
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 21 March 2013 12: 42 New
      +3
      Quote: predator.3
      Resource control, in the case of Iraq, is oil reserves!


      ....exactly!
      And moreover, dear colleague, they say, according to the plans of the USSR SA, in the 3 world it was there in the Middle East that the advanced echelons of the ZKVO should break through and with the capture of oil-bearing areas, the war was supposed to end. Naturally our victory. And even quite likely, without the use of nuclear weapons.
      Imagine a world where the main oil crane in the hands of the Politburo!
      And access to the Atlantic - should have been a distracting secondary front ...
      1. tarks
        tarks 21 March 2013 15: 59 New
        +2
        another version of the "fierce alternative"?
      2. starshina78
        starshina78 21 March 2013 19: 31 New
        +6
        I put a minus to this article for only one sentence: "... having defeated ... my main enemy, the USSR." The USA would never have defeated the USSR if not for Gorbachev's betrayal. Only he and no one else is to blame for the collapse of the USSR. I would be glad to wake up in the morning to hear on the news that a criminal case has been opened against citizen Gorbachev under the article "Treason to the Motherland."
        1. wax
          wax 22 March 2013 00: 49 New
          0
          This is if "would" also have its roots in the model, although it could have been prevented.
        2. vjhbc
          vjhbc 22 March 2013 00: 55 New
          +1
          here you turned off the real nonsense that you won just used not military power but purely demagogic propaganda and the desire of our pseudo elite and intelligentsia for luxury
      3. speedy
        speedy 21 March 2013 20: 35 New
        +3
        Quote: Rus2012
        Quote: predator.3
        Resource control, in the case of Iraq, is oil reserves!

        The author is absolutely right, Satdam Hussein had his own nuclear program (the Israeli Air Force bombed the reactor), the Germans built powerful electromagnetic guns. Between the 1st and 2nd Iraqi wars, Hussein tried to revive the nuclear program, assembled equipment but there was a blockade, his people were under a tight cap ... Oil is certainly good as a bonus, but the main customer of these Muslim pogroms of recent decades is Israel. Now, with the help of Turkey and with the money of the Saudi monarchies, he is pressing Syria and really wants to catch up with Iran.
      4. vjhbc
        vjhbc 22 March 2013 00: 51 New
        0
        comrades and gentlemen, the article is correct. There could be no victory in the capture of the Middle East just for the reason that the United States is not dependent on this oil, it’s just that they are not fools and do not use their oil if it is possible to use someone else’s to buy it for their candy wrappers
    2. mladenec
      mladenec 21 March 2013 18: 30 New
      +5
      Quote: predator.3
      Resource control, in the case of Iraq, is oil reserves!

      In the case of Iraq and Libya, this is an attempt by the leaders of these countries to create an alternative to the dollar !!!!!!!!!! And the Americans get oil for free, in exchange for candy wrappers, reinforcing their liquidity !!!!!!
  2. fenix57
    fenix57 21 March 2013 11: 16 New
    +5
    "It is not surprising that the Arab spring, under the slogans of which archaic and fundamental clericalism descends into the Middle East, became desirable for the USA and was designed by them in many respects... "- oh, and all this will unfold to these" fighters for democracy. " hi
    1. vjhbc
      vjhbc 22 March 2013 00: 59 New
      0
      they don’t give a damn, they cut each other, and if they slaughter several Americans, then it’s to their advantage, how can the martyrs and martyrs for democracy
  3. Makarov
    Makarov 21 March 2013 11: 33 New
    +4
    interesting version ...
    1. Goga
      Goga 21 March 2013 11: 44 New
      11
      Makarov - Colleague, in my opinion, a well-grounded version - everything is "as taught" in Shulkhan Aruch: kill the best of the goyim! Indeed, how many years ago both occupied Iraq and unoccupied Egypt were thrown back, but with Iran it looks like the Yankees have broken off ...
      1. Andrey_K
        Andrey_K 21 March 2013 12: 32 New
        +3
        In addition to the USSR and China, they forgot to mention Japan and South Korea.
        And now, India with Brazil and the other group are catching up.
        "It's too late to drink Borjomi when the kidneys have fallen off."
        So one industrial country more - one less - there is no difference.
        I'm still leaning towards "oil", plus creating a hotbed of chaos for fishing in troubled waters (keeping the military industry doping on arms sales).
        Otherwise, the world was dominated by a bright prospect of "universal peace" and "the uselessness of weapons."
    2. aksakal
      aksakal 21 March 2013 12: 59 New
      +5
      Quote: Makarov

      interesting version ...
      - In my opinion, not quite accurate. Twice the States missed this point - in the case of the USSR of the 30s and in the case of China of the nineties. - Yes, the States did not miss this moment and did not click their beak! They provoked a famine in the USSR in the same thirties with their policies, and in China in 1989, when China was just starting its modernization spurt, it was just a start, the States had already spotted the danger and had a good attempt - Tiananmen Square. So they didn’t click, but everyone in their usual practice perfectly predicted and tried very hard to prevent the development of events that were undesirable for them. Unless they tried direct aggression. So the warriors from the amers are so-so, direct aggression would have come to them with what else side!
      And even if this version is correct, I think that stopping the jerks of some countries that have matured for this is the same as stopping scientific and technological progress. Nobody succeeded. It was possible to delay, slow down, but not completely to stop.
      Well, let's take a country ready for a dash. Even if the States bring chaos there, well, for two decades in this country they will cut each other, kill. Then they will either split up, like Korea or Sudan, or one side will win completely. About five in this country will begin to revive - again there will be modernization ideas and more. Iraq fell victim to direct aggression. It seems there is now a complete mess and terrorist attacks. Everything is much worse than under Saddam - the Iraqi people think so. But Maliki is rushing with plans to buy good weapons. What for? Something tells me that Iraq is stubbornly going to modernize again. And that would not interfere - a little good weapons would not hurt them. Moreover, the amers crushed them, they should have been under Amer’s influence, but no, they are friends with Iran, but they just pretend with the amers ...
      Poor amers, Sisyphus nervously smokes with his pebble aside -)))
      1. opkozak
        opkozak 21 March 2013 15: 51 New
        +2
        Quote: aksakal
        Poor amers, Sisyphus nervously smokes with his pebble aside -)))


        Everyone knows that Americans make the world's best pavers. Iraq, for the Texas Bush family, was the largest paver that rolled billions of bucks into the sand. And, in return - such as control over the Persian Gulf. Fig with two, let’s better control the Saudis, otherwise there are old uncles, but they didn’t leave childhood, they all played war games with strangers and lit a bunch of camels, they will soon eat all the barley in the world .. (Saudi Arabia, the world's largest importer of barley, purchasing more than 40% of world imports, will reduce barley purchases by 17,6% in 2012/13. A decrease in purchases is facilitated by a smaller yield in the key suppliers of barley - Ukraine, Australia, Russia. Also, large reserves accumulated by the beginning of the season can reduce the appetite for imported grain. Thanks to record 2011/12 imports, Saudi Arabia not only replenished stocks that had fallen sharply by the end of 2010/11, but also secured a certain reserve for the current season. Initial stocks in 2012/13 were at the highest level over the past 15 years, which, according to the USDA, should provide a record level of consumption of 7,5 million tons.)
  4. Georgs
    Georgs 21 March 2013 11: 45 New
    +5
    Amers have some kind of demonic-schizophrenic passion for generating all kinds of Frankenstein monsters. And this is in the absence of the ability to predict long-term consequences, in particular for oneself.
    1. Andrey57
      Andrey57 21 March 2013 11: 58 New
      +8
      It is difficult to explain to the pit digging to others that you can rattle yourself into it too. Once, during a trip to India, I had to talk with amers, so they are panicky afraid to say that they are from USA, they say anything, just not the name of their country)))) They are really hated around the world, we laughed and said that we’re not afraid to say that we are from Russia, after that they had a very sour laughing
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 21 March 2013 14: 31 New
        0
        We didn’t build chemical plants in India, which at once took the life and health of half a million people ... A bandit is always like that - when he is not in power, he is quiet, sweet and invisible. Didn't your slippers disappear after talking with representatives of the "world hegemon"? It was worth checking ...
    2. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 21 March 2013 13: 38 New
      +2
      Quote: GeorGS
      demonic schizophrenic


      That's right!
    3. skeptic
      skeptic 21 March 2013 14: 45 New
      +4
      Quote: GeorGS
      Amers have some kind of demonic-schizophrenic passion for generating all kinds of Frankenstein monsters.


      No, just earlier, when they pitted different Indian tribes against each other, they understood the simple truth that you can earn on both opposing sides, as the opponents weakened, and clean up their territories. This amers perfectly used in the first and second world wars. Now they are driving the East into the Middle Ages, creating for themselves cheap sources of raw materials and consumers of "glass beads". Russia is also a big "raw material Klondike", so a little earlier or later the US plans to do something similar with our country. IF WE ARE ALL TOGETHER, WE WILL ALLOW THIS.
      1. Vasya Ivanov
        Vasya Ivanov 22 March 2013 06: 17 New
        +1
        When we talk about the United States, we should mean by this the Jews. Since the country doesn’t exist at all, there is a circus with a beautiful sign and Jewish puppeteers. When you look at world politics through the prism of the hegemony of the Jews, everything falls into place.
  5. Stiletto
    Stiletto 21 March 2013 11: 48 New
    +2
    Quote: Makarov
    interesting version ...

    ... One of the versions. The version about Bush's personal vendetta is closer to me. After all, not only the country was rolled into rubble, but also its leader was hanged by the best democrats of the sublunary world. Such a good "grin of freedom on the principles of humanism", isn't it?
    1. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 21 March 2013 13: 42 New
      0
      Quote: Stiletto
      Such a good "grin of freedom on the principles of humanism",


      Fascism with a smile on his face and with the words - we will fight for them.
    2. mamba
      mamba 21 March 2013 13: 48 New
      +2
      Quote: Stiletto
      I'm closer to Bush’s personal vendetta.

      In the end, he (Saddam Hussein) is the guy who once wanted to kill my dad. Therefore: We cannot allow terriers to take over our country. But the caring son was sometimes tormented by doubts: There are many thoughts in my head, but I don’t know which one is right. . However, he was pleased with the results: I made good decisions, not only in the past, but also in the future.
      Americans themselves often consider him a clinical moron. Also known as "Texas Hook_", "H_Bush" and "Sred_ny cowboy".

      [media = http: //www.youtube.com/watch? feature = player_embedded & v = sSZ5Ra86PCc]
  6. OTTO
    OTTO 21 March 2013 11: 52 New
    0
    Quote: GeorGS
    Amers have some kind of demonic-schizophrenic passion for generating all kinds of Frankenstein monsters. And this is in the absence of the ability to predict long-term consequences, in particular for oneself.

    Europe (such a neighbor in the south) will soon have consequences, and it looks like America is happy with that too, and it won’t be any easier for us.
  7. pinecone
    pinecone 21 March 2013 12: 10 New
    +1
    From the article: "... Western corporations, which created this technological breakthrough in Iran."
    It would be interesting to know what kind of leap was "created" by Western corporations in Iran.
  8. apro
    apro 21 March 2013 12: 15 New
    0
    The most correct interpretation of the war in Iraq by N. Starikov somehow Saddam was still a puppet of amers and this whole war was calculated and subsequently it happened that Iraq didn’t resist although there was no reason to attack. such a pleasure, and in the event of war, he would fight selflessly. And beat an imaginary enemy without significant losses on his part, and to raise the rating than not charging.
  9. 120352
    120352 21 March 2013 12: 21 New
    +1
    Let's look deeper. Namely, the results of the war. There was such a conqueror Alexander the Great. He conquered half the world. And where is his conquest today? There was Napoleon, Hitler, but who only was not! The outcome of the war is always the same: no gain, only hardship! There are no winners in wars, there are only victims!
    1. FC SKIF
      FC SKIF 21 March 2013 12: 45 New
      0
      War makes sense in the long run if the occupied territories are settled and / or assimilation of conquered lands is carried out.
      Otherwise, it's just a banal robbery. In ancient times, in order to rob a neighbor, no excuse was invented, such as "spreading democracy" or something like that. This is much more honest. In our hypocritical time, they try not to even pronounce the word "war". There is military action, but there is no war - "forcing peace", "spreading democracy", etc.
  10. amp
    amp 21 March 2013 12: 24 New
    -3
    What is such an Islamic alliance, is it not Iraq and Iran? )))
    Yeah, they fought against each other for 8 years and then they will conclude an alliance.
    As for the Wahhabi monarchies, the author is simply not in the subject. They are just being modernized in full swing. Science cities are already building in Saudi Arabia.
    Plus, Dubai has become a global financial center.

    Here I must also say that Iraq Hussein is a secular state where the power belonged to the Ba'ath Party. This is a socialist party. To imagine some kind of Islamic union for a secular state is quite difficult.

  11. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 21 March 2013 12: 39 New
    +1
    I do not agree. 10 years ago, if, according to the logic of the author, it is more logical to destroy Iran - Iraq was so half-dead after the 1991 year. Or miscalculated the United States?
  12. Khamsin
    Khamsin 21 March 2013 13: 06 New
    +5
    Amer consider myself the arbiter of the fate of the world, how long will their imagination last? It seems we will catch the collapse of the United States, just a little bit left)))
    1. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 21 March 2013 13: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: Hamsin
      It seems we will catch the collapse of the United States,


      The dream of a lifetime!
  13. Black
    Black 21 March 2013 13: 30 New
    +2
    Quote: Hamsin
    It seems we will catch the collapse of the United States, just a little bit left)))

    On what basis do you think so? on the basis of your dislike? - so you are not God, not even old Hottabych. In addition, if Tam goes away, do you think halva will appear in our mouth right away?

    According to the article. The version is just interesting. But true goals are simpler — resources, goal achieved.
  14. fenix57
    fenix57 21 March 2013 13: 33 New
    +3
    Quote: Hamsin
    It seems we will catch the collapse of the United States, just a little bit left)))

    So it's time for this to happen.
  15. radio operator
    radio operator 21 March 2013 13: 36 New
    +2
    And there is.
    Throwing away the husk about weapons of mass destruction and "human rights" - it's about oil. in money.
    It's simple.
  16. Urrry
    Urrry 21 March 2013 13: 38 New
    +1
    In fact, for the United States, the entire continent of Eurasia is a competitor ... Europe, Russia, China, India, Iran, and other states that are gaining strength. With their support for "Islamic fundamentalism" they are ready to rock the entire continent and throw it off in one fell swoop - while staying overseas, they collect only "stitch coupons". It's a shame that Europe does not want (or because of the betrayal of its interests by the leadership of the EU countries) to understand that for the United States it is also a competitor, and an "ally" only for the time being. Strengthening and strengthening of radicalism in the Middle East and Central Asia will inevitably hit Europe due to the large "Islamic diaspora" ... all of this will certainly hit both Russia and India, and China will not escape - because the markets and sources of gas and oil supplies will fly to hell at the beginning of the cataclysm ... the United States itself from such a collapse - only benefits: on another continent they are still safer, they themselves will not fight directly against Russia or China, and "watching the battle from the outside" will come to the already cleaned war territory, with all their deposits
    1. amp
      amp 21 March 2013 13: 51 New
      +1
      The United States plunges the world into chaos, so that the United States seemed an island of calm and prosperity, as during the world wars. For global investment to flow there. And the EU is here in proportion.
      Now they are hitting the Arabs, but they will hit us too. Otherwise, there is no sense in this. We and China are in line. That is why it is better to confront them in Syria, while it is still far from us. And it was even better to do it in Libya, which was even further. Sorry at the helm then was a bear cub Dima.
  17. Zeus
    Zeus 21 March 2013 13: 53 New
    +4
    In fact, Vyacheslav Nikolayevich Matuzov, specialist in the Middle East, is more credible than this article. And he bluntly says that the United States has much more global plans than some single third world countries. the states plan for many decades to come, and their main goal is Russia and China. Through the concept of the Greater Middle East, which also includes African countries, the United States began to chop down all regimes, including allied ones (Iraq, Libya, Egypt). They are just pawns on this chessboard. And the main goals are Russia and China.
    On YouTube, a bunch of interviews with Matuzov. http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D0%B7%D0%BE


    %D0%B2&oq=%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2&gs_l=youtube.3..0.10079.109


    51.0.11096.7.5.0.2.2.0.107.452.4j1.5.0...0.0...1ac.1.BXJVCCsEPCM
  18. mladenec
    mladenec 21 March 2013 18: 29 New
    0
    Quote: predator.3
    Resource control, in the case of Iraq, is oil reserves!

    In the case of Iraq and Libya, this is an attempt by the leaders of these countries to create an alternative to the dollar !!!!!!!!!! And the Americans get oil for free, in exchange for candy wrappers, reinforcing their liquidity !!!!!!
  19. mashinist
    mashinist 21 March 2013 19: 42 New
    +1
    The true reasons in the plans of the Pentagon .. and how nebylo loud this statement is true
  20. Watchman
    Watchman 21 March 2013 21: 24 New
    -2
    If Saddam was forgiven in Kuwait in '91, he would go further - to Saudi Arabia or initiate another Arab-Israeli war and the result would be exactly the same as now.
  21. Selevc
    Selevc 21 March 2013 21: 26 New
    0
    Yeah America and Europe are now sowing the wind and time will pass and they will reap the storm !!! I think that our generation can, and our children will certainly see a nuclear mushroom over New York or London, for example ... And Russia will not be here - just some kind of faithful Muslim will send souls to hell WELL VERY BIG SINNERS !!! :)))))))))
  22. Alexej.Taran
    Alexej.Taran 21 March 2013 23: 36 New
    0
    I agree with the author of the article, but there are still many questions that the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the European Union, and Turks solve or are trying to solve with the help of the interventionist and revolutionary in this region. This is not the end, but only the beginning of a new redivision of the world.
  23. I think so
    I think so 22 March 2013 00: 03 New
    0
    The promise in the article is false. How could Saddam Iraq in principle be an ally of Iran? Complete nonsense and amateurism ... And the author did not give an answer to the question posed in the title ... An empty article.
    1. Alexander 1958
      Alexander 1958 22 March 2013 00: 07 New
      0
      For I think so
      Iran, like Iraq, has a majority population of Shiism. and anti-Americanism is a very good basis for an alliance. By the way, during the last Gulf War, all the most modern Iraqi planes flew to Iran. The wind was fair, perhaps ...
      Alexander 1958
    2. wax
      wax 22 March 2013 01: 01 New
      0
      How could Saddam Iraq in principle be an ally of Iran? Complete nonsense and amateurism

      This is momentary, but the author of the article is geostrategic right.
      The author also correctly illuminates one of the strategic areas of US policy - by all possible forces to counteract the military-technological progress of any competitors in America, including Europe.
  24. Selevc
    Selevc 22 March 2013 09: 37 New
    0
    Yeah America and Europe are now sowing the wind and time will pass and they will reap the storm !!! I think that our generation can, and our children will certainly see a nuclear mushroom over New York or London, for example ... And Russia will not be here - just some kind of faithful Muslim will send souls to hell WELL VERY BIG SINNERS !!! :)))))))))
  25. APASUS
    APASUS 22 March 2013 22: 26 New
    0
    Resources, resources and once again resources ..................
    The essence does not change for centuries!
    Crusades - were inherently the robbery of entire nations !!
    Democratic wars - have not changed their essence ..... ONLY A SIGN !!!