Now as I noted before Saddam was not ousted but the threat possibly from him developing a nuclear program. an, and other WMD was considered substantial. and the United States, along with other allies imposed a no-fly zone on Iraq, and indeed, imposed a zone in the north which Saddam was not allowed to enter at all with the, the, giving the Kurds in the north some autonomy. but having this presence required a, a huge infrastructure. In the aftermath of the first Gulf War what we saw was an expansion of US military bases both to do the no-fly zone. but to protect Kuwait, so bases in Saudi Arabia, in Kuwait in Bahrain, navy bases in Kuwait the fifth fleet stationing in, in Bahrain in Dubai and air force bases as well throughout the region. And this is an infrastructure that was continued to be built up after, even after 9/11 but you can see beforehand just a much, much larger military presence than anything that was anticipated or experienced before 1980. So here we have two competing narratives. first the idea that it was American weakness; the Vietnam Syndrome. the idea that we were unwilling, unable to essentially meet threat with force because of our fears of Vietnam in the past entanglements. and that is what gave the message to others in the Middle East that they could assert themselves and maybe even threaten us without the idea of retribution, that they would pay a price. And that this is what embolden Osama bin Laden to believe and have the audacity to believe that he could fight a, a conflict against the United States and win. and we know some element of truth to that. Bin Laden wrote that he thought the fact that America left Somalia after one large-scale skirmish showed that it was a paper tiger that would cut and run. he also thought, from his experience in Afghanistan fighting against the Soviet Union, that even a small band of dedicated fighters could topple a great super power. So, there is that element of truth but I think it's hard to explain the totality. it is a not just this notion of American weakness perhaps that motivated Bin Laden, but a whole slew of forces that we discussed earlier in, in this class. the increasing Islamic identity. the forces of globalization that were entering and causing conflicts in the region. the frustration with so many Muslims with the the corrupt regimes that were governing them and having so little economic sense. the fact of other countries, other regions of the world sprinting, ahead of them. and, and, how did the Neocons propose that the uses of force would have somehow quelled Bin Laden. that if we had bombed Hezbollah somehow, this would have sent the more radical elements like Al Qaeda running to the hills. no. It might have, have increased their sense of grievance and frustration even more. are the neo-cons arguing for a full-scale war against Iran at that time? how would that have been justified and conducted? So I think this notion of just American weakness and our failure to respond to all these different kinds of threats Is, that's what led us to the 9/11 moment. And what Podhoretz calls World War four as being much too simplistic. there's this second competing narrative that it was our desire to build a Pax Americana in the Middle East. That our desire for a lucrative way of life dependent on a foreign sources of oil what was that drove us to increase our presence and then to militarize the Middle East. And it is these grievances, it's our presence ultimately, that motivated Bin Laden to want to strike against us. And, again, there is strong element of truth to that. we do know that this was a grievance that motivated Bin Laden but also helped to get Bin Laden's support because it was this anti-Americanism and frustration with the American presence that even people who didn't like Bin Laden or his tactics or believe in his religious or political ideas saw him as a force against an American domination. An American presence of which they were not comfortable. none the less, I think the idea that the only reason we were in the Middle East was to build this Pax Americana to protect our sources of oil also doesn't tell the whole story. the Middle East in the 1970s and 80s was the battleground in the cold war and if our, our presence was increased to counteract the possibility of the, of a Soviet increase there as well. So it was a proxy ground for the Cold War. of course our defense of the state of Israel was complicated and also played into our increasing intervention in the Middle East against and to counter balance some of the other threats that Israel was facing. after the Gulf War, of course, there had been evidence that Saddam Hussein was building nuclear weapons and had stockpiles of chemical weapons in, inside Iraq so our presence was there to prevent that from occurring. And then, of course, there is the Iran. And post the 1979 rev, revolution, its desire to be a regional power and to impose its will and to spread its revolution to other states. So the United States military was present in many instances because other countries, allies of ours, wanted us there, invited us there to try to counteract this threat. If we hadn't come would Iran simply have been satisfied staying within it's borders, and not try to push it's revolution elsewhere we'll never know but that was certainly another reason that our interventions occurred. so we have a, a complicated story of our Middle East policy. It's difficult to explain through one particular paradigm. That's why I wanted to expose you to more than one. But think of here we are towards the end, the, the last phases of the 20th century we have a very large scale military, US military presence throughout the region. we have many many different interests, many of which I've just discussed. And we have many threats, complex forces. Whether it be Iraq, Iran Al Qaeda, Hezbollah Hamas and other, other potent organizations. all active, all willing to use force to different degrees and all opposed in many ways to American interests. And this is a situation that faced the last American President of the 20th century, President Clinton as he faced his his term in office. And that's what we'll turn to next.
