Mobs, Messiahs, and Markets

Clueless in Baghdad

Of course, you can't really fault the Bush team for wanting to take Baghdad. Every serious empire does. The Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Persians, Arabs, Mongols, Turks, even the English got their hands on it. In terms of killing, the most recent imperial grab ranks somewhere between those of Tamerlane and George V. The English killed about 10,000 insurgents in the 1920s. Tamerlane is reputed to have butchered millions in the fourteenth century.

But in terms of humbug, the Bush administration outdoes them both. If it weren't for the deaths, watching the Bush gang stumble along the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates would be amusing. The U.S. forces bring the usual mayhem and single‐source contracts. But using the language of Thomas Jefferson, they preach “liberty.” Borrowing the words of the Tory jurist Blackstone, they offer their victims a “fair trial.”

But that is where they wash up. In the words of Saddam Hussein, if the United States, Britain, and every other imperial ruler who ever cut off a head or blew up an outhouse can kill insurgents, why couldn't I?

Mind you, no one doubts that the noose was too good for Saddam. But compared to the present, his rule is beginning to look like the good old days.

“People are doing the same as [in] Saddam's time and worse,” says Ayad Allawi, former prime minister and foe of Saddam. “We are hearing about secret police, secret bunkers, where people are being interrogated. A lot of Iraqis are being tortured or killed in the ...