After The Wars, Now What?

By Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa, (On Twitter) @c_tamirisa

Flattr this

Today, I received a letter from The White House by email thanking me for writing about the Iraq war. It had caught me by surprise because the response came more than 9 years after the war had begun and close to the possible re-election of a Democrat president who had inherited that war.

When I had written that letter in 2003, as a new citizen, naturalized in 2002, I was urging the George W Bush White House, in an email about a one-page-and-a-half, to reconsider the Bush administration’s approach to war well before any Washington policy wonk could make a coherent case against it after 9/11.

I thought a case for war could be made if The White House wanted, but urged patience akin to Jim Baker’s diplomacy during Gulf War I in several preceding pieces I had written in Georgetown University as a graduate public policy student in 2002. Former president Bill Clinton later appeared once on Larry King Live on CNN and had concurred with my position. Given the ways of Washington, in a visit to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) with my Federal Reserve colleagues, I knew that Gene Sperling, former Chair of Clinton’s National Economic Council (NEC), had gotten wind of my Iraq war email to the Bush White House.

I had never put a dollar number on the war estimates in 2002 (economists Joseph Stiglitz and William Nordhaus later did in a paper). I was proven to be correct in 2006 after the Baker-Hamilton report’s 79 recommendations (79 happens to be September 07 in the European date convention – Queen Elizabeth I’s birthday as is also my former spouse’s).

Afghanistan was an expected and necessary geopolitical response to 9/11 against those whom I saw as transnational stateless criminals, independent of any causes of their behaviors rooted in American incompetence after 1991 (plenty of evidence of our government’s incompetence is now public). Al Qaeda had attacked and America had to retaliate swiftly with a plan. I was in Moscow, Russia a few weeks after 9/11 baptizing my daughter into the Russian Orthodox faith of my former spouse.

The second Iraq war – whose rumblings had begun in 1993, upon the reelection loss of George H W Bush to Bill Clinton, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) under the leadership of Donald Rumsfeld who would later on become Bush 43′s Secretary of Defense  - was, in my view, unnecessary. My ‘new citizen’ memo to The White House in 2003 on the eve of the second Iraq war, after many unpublished letters to newspaper editors, was the culmination.

Saddam Hussein would have eventually whittled away similar to Osama bin Laden, as I opined to several of my colleagues at the Federal Reserve. I preferred on-the-ground special operations focused on distancing US and British interests from Iraqi oil instead of a full scale ‘coalition of the willing’ invasion to save Churchill’s legacy about which many were skeptical because of US-UK oil motives. Iraqi oil and resources were Iraq’s, not America’s or Europe’s if the trust of the Iraqi people was to be won. The key policy issue at home was the economic forecast and structural change 10 years from 2002, not Iraq, while Afghanistan was being worked on.

Current US president, Barack Obama, in 2003 before a small group of his supporters in Illinois had called it a dumb war. Indeed it was a dumb war, while legitimately acknowledging and recognizing the sacrifices of our armed forces because their civilian leaders had made the mistakes, not the Pentagon.

From the experience of the last decade with America’s second Peloponnesian War (the first was won by Athens), two important insights ought to appeal to this president and Mitt Romney, after 9/11 and on the eve of Syria and Iran even as Afghanistan is being responsibly wound down by 2014:

First, neither Iraq would have been necessary nor the Kyoto Protocol had Clinton-Gore truly put people first. It is time to do so now.

Second, it is not yet too late to uninvite a second decade of energy shocks, in the 4th decade after the 1970s, if Washington gets its act together on a war footing inside America’s borders. Nixon-Kissinger’s China, otherwise, will be a pyrrhic victory.

The wayward government and its cronies on Wall Street since 1993 need to be trammeled into responsible behaviors by the people if the United States is to maintain its way of life using its own resources going forward.

About these ads

About Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa

http://www.thecommonera.com/Common_Era/Me.html
This entry was posted in Economics, Energy and Natural Resources, National Security and Defense, North America and Caribbean, Politics, Transformations LLC and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to After The Wars, Now What?

  1. 15h 1776 @1_776
    @davidaxelrod None for Big oil and big wind. Gas/oil below ground reserve taps while putting in place longer term clean energy structure.
    Hide conversation Reply Delete Favorite
    11:10 PM – 30 Jul 12 via Twitter for iPhone · Details

    16h David Axelrod ‏@davidaxelrod
    Mitt backs subsidies for Big Oil, but not alternative energy. For Iowa, it’s a no-wind situation. http://dmreg.co/MXktOW
    Expand Reply Retweet Favorite

    ——————-

    To David Axelrod: About the picture circulating on Facebook:

    Who wrote the 8 things on the white board in the picture for Facebook?

    1. I have strong circumstantial evidence that I was abused by the Federal Reserve to favor Facebook, in violation of government ethics by using my name and ideas to monetarily benefit others without my consent. Facebook IPO SEC filing is on 02/01/XXXX the same month/day but after my 02/01/2003 internal memo to the Fed.

    2. There are 8 achievements in the list. I have 8 items in my sustainability framework on my website at http://www.tamirisa.com.

    3. The last item has the numbers 8 and 2.6. Item 8 in my framework is for engineering the how of sustainability and 2.6 is for the jobs created in millions signaling me to be politically correct by supporting the Fed because the Fed is where I had compared the coming predicament of the United States to the sinking of the Titanic on more than one occasion in my Op-Ed articles I circulated to the news media at least 2 years ago.

    It takes time to turn around the Titanic or any large ship, but the current situation flies in the face of economic theory as I have stated elsewhere on several occasions. Job creation must lead recovery not lag, contrary to Summers and Blanchard. Therefore, even if it takes time, investment ex ante must create jobs before recovery can be self-sustainable.

    It is demagoguery, political deception and self-serving to save political and personal friendships with Bernanke, Summers, Geithner and other establishmentarian figures at the expense of the US economy.

    The implication is that in exchange for my lobby work thus far on item 8 to get to GSA sustainability initiatives, if I support the Fed by being politically correct as an outsider (I left the institution on 06/16/2010) I get to either be a Fed governor or be reinstated/promoted to grade level FR 26 in the Office of Board Members at the Fed because the promotion was written into my performance review in the year 2000 without the Fed following through on actually awarding the promotion.

    No deal. I need the Fed to pay personal injury damages for gross misconduct. I cannot be asked to support the Fed against my will damaging my reputation.

  2. 20h The White House Blog ‏@blog44
    Salute the Troops: Two Years after the End of Combat Missions in Iraq http://at.wh.gov/1mdh54
    Expand Reply Retweeted Favorite
    19h 1776 ‏@1_776

    @blog44 Mr President and @vp @joebiden I run a business that sells policy as political strategy to influence politics.
    Hide conversation Reply Delete Favorite
    4:26 PM – 30 Aug 12 · Details

  3. Президент РоссииVerified ‏@KremlinRussia
    На заседании Совбеза РФ обсуждалась деятельность ОПК, реализация госпрограммы вооружения http://krln.ru/dggR
    Details Reply Retweet Favorited

    1776 @1_776
    @KremlinRussia есть только один глобальный интерес: Аграрная Jeffersonianism. http://www.thecommonera.com/Common_Era/Investor_Relations.html … , http://ctamirisa.com/2012/07/13/the-rise-of-the-reich-again/
    Reply Delete Favorite
    1:00 PM – 31 Aug 12

  4. 3h UK Prime Minister ‏@Number10gov
    Margaret Thatcher and British Intelligence during the Cold War era – read our exclusive article http://bit.ly/QYxAOv
    Expand Reply Retweet Favorited

    2h 1776 ‏@1_776
    @Number10gov In sum, there is only one global interest: Agrarian Jeffersonianism. http://www.thecommonera.com/Common_Era/Investor_Relations.html
    Hide conversation Reply Delete Favorite
    10:57 AM – 31 Aug 12 · Details

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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