From Mecca To Baghdad, Bakr to Bush

Whole regions were dependant upon the hundreds of billions of dollars the US pumped into its military: regions that were not just local to the US, but around the globe. Whereas Washington DC and many of its satellite cities which contained defence industry companies would suffer measurably if the military budget was cut, many smaller cities like Portsmouth Maine or Fort Campbell Kentucky would suffer immeasurably. Not just regions in the US, but globally as well. Nations such as Germany, Japan and any of the 47 other countries the US is deployed in were all dependant upon US military dollars. The US$650 billion the US spent on defence in 2005 is part of a global industry, not just a domestic one.

Abu Bakr was a neo-con. His domestic and social stability were far more secure if the soldiers were off doing military things. He kept his army occupied by sending them into Iraq to conquer the Persians. America in the late 1990s faced the same conundrum. Congressional representatives were elected on platforms of keeping the military pork in their districts. There was also the problem of the massively effective and dominant military. No-one really wanted to give it up, or even decrease this enormous power. Well known American neo-con Irving Kristol wrote in 2003:

Behind all this is a fact: the incredible military superiority of the United States vis-a-vis the nations of the rest of the world, in any imaginable combination. ... And it is a fact that if you have the kind of power we now have, either you will find opportunities to use it, or the world will discover them for you.

Ronald Reagan's kalipha, George W. Bush came to the same conclusion as Abu Bakr - and sent his army off to Iraq too.