Home | Hegemony | Archives | Blogroll | Resume | Links | RSS Feed | subscribe by email    


to Reason


blog roll

    Of all the "irrelevant" canidates..., 2003-05-13 06:08:24 | Main | Mexico's dirty war..., 2003-05-23 23:18:00

    "Something smells funny":

    Attack and response.

    What is suggested by the public record of events on 9-11 is a baneful amount of negligence, possibly criminal, and were there willful negligence the motivation was spelled out clearly by the ideological center of the Bush administration on page 51 of the fabled 2000 PNAC planning document Rebuilding America's Defenses: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." Considering the many unanswered questions that remain it hardly seems specious to ask for answers, that the administration is blocking public access to such answers means a lot of nuts will accept instead to contemplate conspiracy theories, as the administration - in its irrational exuberence - is acting exactly as though there was one.

    Mid-March of this year we were reading reports that Al-Qaeda had "effectively been defeated", terrorism experts will tell you the recent wave of anti-western terrorism - the attacks on Shell stations in Pakistan, the Riyadh and Morocco bombings, the gunfight in Algeria, foiled plots in Lebanon - are Iraq blowback. An obvious conclusion for anyone realizing that the "new Al-Qaeda" is primarily the adoption of an ideology - one might find it increasingly difficult to call it a terrorist "network" because it's becoming an internationalist movement. The obvious question then is if the war on Iraq was part of the "war on terror" what point it served - besides killing 5,000 to 10,000 innocents, using Iraqi oil to pay US companies for the reconstruction of a country we destroyed, striking deals with a terrorist group that isn't a terrorist group because terrorist attacks on Iran aren't terrorist attacks (what might be called an example of "moral clarity"), failing thus far to bring Saddam to justice or order and stability to Iraq, all mirroring thus far the similar lack of progress in Afghanistan. What we have done is justify terrorism to more young Muslims, generating more terrorism, and with no WMD found after a month of their own inspections we're getting mere promises from coallition leaders that they haven't planted any for UNMOVIC, who finally might be allowed back in.

    What do we get for all this? A sliver of a ray of hope for Iraqis while the US lavishes support on other repressive regimes, following verbatim the program that lead to 9/11 in the first place and threatening to create anti-American anger where, as in Central Asia, little presently exists. This reflects a policy that itself is willfully criminal, stemming from ideologies based on vapid fantasy that have proven in the past weeks to actually increase the security risk for US citizens at home and abroad, nevermind everyone else, under the hubris of protecting them. The threat itself is of little consequence, as it poises little real threat to the US government itself, but can be inflated to publically justify stupid acts of aggression and racketeering that expand US dominance and make the world, generally, a worse place to be.

:: posted by buermann @ 2003-05-23 22:19:08 CST | link

    go ahead, express that vague notion

    your turing test:

journals, notes,
other curmudgeonry

- A Timeline -

Oil for Nothing:
US Holds On Humanitarian Supplies
Iraq: 1997-2001

the good book
and other cultural

The Autobiography
Mother Jones

Contact Info: