The Age of Empires.

There is a huge outcry about recently published Intelligence Committee reports both in US and Britain. The blame game is on role, as ruling political classes of both countries are cleaning their hands of Iraq mess and putting intelligence agencies on death row. (Tenet is already gone; well he should have been retired long time back!)
But is this war really caused due to Intelligence failure? Look at the following statements issued by similar authorities, but the time gap between them is almost 80 years.

“Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators…it is the home and desire of the British people and the nations in alliance with them that the Arab race may rise once more to greatness and renown among the peoples of the earth
- General F.S. Maude, Commander of British Forces.
Baghdad, March 19, 1917.


Unlike many armies in the world, you came not to conquer, not to occupy, but to liberate, and the Iraqi people know this.
-Donald Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense
Baghdad, April 29, 2003.

The similarity between two statements is not that the common language is English but they are issued by white people and against same Arabs. Of course I am not suggesting that this war is between two races, but I think the time gap between two statements is actually period between two imperialists ages.
The Iraq war is return of Age of Empires. It’s lesson to new generation and reminder to old generation that this age belongs to American empire, as it was age of British Empire 50 years ago. This war is not about liberation or planting seeds of democracy and certainly not result of bad intelligence but this war is about sustaining an Empire that depends heavily on Oil and Iraq has Oil.
The most distinctive feature between American empire and other empires of the past is that American empire is not Land hungry as it has its own ample land mass. Money is the driving force of America. Where there is money there ought to be Americans. Money is the central philosophy; it’s the building block of American society, of American empire. It’s the only language they understand. They (American Empire) want to keep their people in best possible luxury, so they want to use unlimited amount of resources in every sense. And due to tremendous development in communication, all the resources that are not available on American soil can be brought from other parts of the world, so there is no need to physically capture any country. Better strategy is to keep puppet government at the helm of the country and then be the sole profiteer of its resources. It makes perfect business sense as least human resource and capital is invested in this process and returns are pretty high.
There are numerous instances of this strategy. For example, constant intervention of US troops in Central America; the monetary plundering of South-East Asia and South America. Pro-American governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan. (Oh ! I love Arabia(n) (Oil)!). Similarly various military outposts throughout world. (Taiwan, South Korea, Diego Marcia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan) to keep eye on emerging threat.
Is there anything wrong in the theory of world domination? Rationally speaking it’s not our choice as there will always be someone to grab the power and, particularly power to rule world is irresistible. World history can always be divided into age of world superpowers. Be it Romans, Alexander or Emperor Ashoka’s empire stretching from present day Afghanistan to South-East Asia. Or be it very primitive and cruel Huns and Muslim plunderers of medieval period. Since the European Renaissance the power struggle became intense and various powers of Western Europe started quest to dominate world. So there is no choice of equality based world order, but its just choice of accepting or denying the power of world dominator.
So anyone who reads this column, let me know your opinion, post the comment and play active intellectual part in this very volatile era of return of Age of Empires.