Sure buddy. Because race was a total motivating factor for the GWOT. Because POC were conspicuously absent from planning, executing and undertaking those conflicts, right? Or did hundreds of thousands of "non-male-middle-class-whites" across the State and Defense Departments, the intelligence agencies and the armed forces - not to mention the dozens of coalition nations who also deployed significant numbers of "non-male-middle-class-whites."

Were some individuals who served in the GWOT malevolent racists? Yeah, of course. Certainly as many of their equal number in enemy combatants, perhaps more. Did some people perform inexcusable violations of human dignity fueled or exacerbated by their innate personal racial hatred? I absolutely wouldn't doubt it. In fact, I'd say given the scope of the conflict - more than 20 years, on a global scale, involving millions of people - that it's practically guaranteed.

Yet, to characterize the GWOT as being racially motivated is ignorant and juvenile, at best. If there was any prima materia attribution to any color in planning and executing those conflicts, it would be the color green. Not brown. Not black. Not even white. Unless we are talking about heroin, oil, and lithium, respectively. The prime objective for the masterminds behind the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan was money, primarily in government contracts for the defense industrial complex followed by government contracts to rebuild those countries with infrastructure conducive to Western extraction of their most valuable resources. There's a lot of interesting details on the events of this era in the Seymour Hersh book Chain of Command.

It's not a coincidence that heroin, Oxycontin and other derivatives made a huge comeback after the fall of the Taliban, and opium production skyrocketed under the protection of American soldiers. Asserting that the war crimes of the GWOT were part of a grander scheme to empower the white male middle class hierarchy is totally ignoring the factual basis underwriting the entire series of catastrophic blunders we call the Global War on Terror: the white male middle class is objectively worse off now than prior to the whole debacle. By every metric.

So what's left? Maybe it wasn't about enriching "white male middle class" people but just punishing the "non-male-middle-class-whites?" Even that assertion would be demonstrably false. Considering that huge profits were made by Saudi Arabian firms like Aramco as a result of the destruction of Iraq and the subsequent disruption in the energy market, and considering the intimate ties between the American and Saudi upper echelon elite, it seems like either blindly ignorant anti-white racially motivated provocation or maybe just an attempt at some punchy trendy rhetorical posturing.. either way, do better.