jump to navigation

My lifestyle vs. his life 27 October 2008

Posted by MOZAFFAR in Misc.

Unfortunately, it is still a dinnertime pastime to assert that the current War on Iraq is nothing more than a war for oil. It is unfortunate because the point is irrelevant. That it is a war for oil is rather obvious. It is, however, overlooked that the overwhelming majority of finger-pointers did not change any of their oil-consuming habits in protest of this war. Meaning, people did not start abandoning their SUV’s when they determined that the war was for oil (~2003). Rather, they started changing their driving habits when the cost of gas became too high, which was some five years later (~2008). The protest against the war was nothing more than dinnertime lip service. The fact of the matter remains that people do not change unless they are compelled to change.

Thus, can we not argue that a purpose for the war was to sustain our own lifestyles? Countless civilians are getting slaughtered daily and countless more are getting injured daily for that simple purpose: we are, as a national body, seeking to continue our lifestyle, regardless of what the cost may be to others. That is exploitation. Most exploitations do not seek to destroy another people. Rather, most exploitations result when the exploiter wants something for him/herself.

Consider it further, that the national protests regarding the war did not gain mainstream stream except in response to (a) the increasing number of dead US soldiers, and (b) gas prices. Had gas prices remained stable, and had the number of US soldiers remained “low” the outcry against the war would be so much lower. Meaning, had our comfort zone not been threatened, half this nation would still be praising the president. It is our comfort zone that will end the war, not our sense of justice.



1. Khalil - 27 October 2008

well-written! thank you for reminding us all

2. Aamina Nizar - 27 October 2008

absolutely true….

3. talib - 28 October 2008

yeah, the massive protests before the invasion and during its earlier parts were seen as pacifist hippies doing their thing, i.e., too far on the left to be taken seriously. people who feel strongly against the war nowadays, who had not felt so strongly in the past, point to feelings of betrayal, i think, more than they point to gas prices and american lives. the criticism that we hear most often is, there were no weapons of mass destruction; there was no link to al-qaeda; you tricked us. but, that is still the wrong reason to be against the invasion. if even the slightest trace of uranium enrichment had been found, by chance even, people would have praised bush and deemed iraq a costly but necessary war to protect civilization, i.e., the people that matter, i.e., us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: