Let me say this up front: I do not hate the French. On my front door is a small, enamel sign that states �attention au chien�. It means, essentially, �beware of the dog(s)�. I have not taken it down because of this recent unfortunateness in the United Nations. I have nothing against the French people and may very well start drinking their wine again.
That stated, their obstinance with regards to the United States attempt to actually enforce UN resolution 1441 has gone beyond wearing thin. Indeed, I have started to wonder while the government of Jacques Chirac would take such a principled stand. I mean, come on. Not to sound like Jonah Goldberg, but this is the French we�re talking about.
The answer is probably what I suspected but could never quite prove: money. That�s what I contend it�s always about. But I could never bring myself to believe that oil contracts or miscellaneous trade deals between Iraq and France would be so important as to force Chirac to irreparably damage French / US relations. Business is business and can be replaced or regenerated as needed.
Well, it appears that Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard (part of Rupert Murdoch�s News Corp. empire) is offering another spin that rings truer than lost trade: campaign payola. In this piece by Melana Zyla Vickers, Saddam himself is quoted as saying:
As for financiers, industrialists and above all those responsible for military industry, the question must be put to French politicians: Who did not benefit from these business contracts and relationships with Iraq? . . . With respect to the politicians, one need only refer back to the declarations of all the political parties of France, Right and Left. All were happy to brag about their friendship with Iraq and to refer to common interests. From Mr. Chirac [now the center-right president] to Mr. Chevenement [the socialist former defense minister] . . . politicians and economic leaders were in open competition to spend time with us and flatter us. We have now grasped the reality of the situation [of France's support for the 1991 Gulf War, a betrayal in Saddam's eyes]. If the trickery continues, we will be forced to unmask them, all of them, before the French public.
Well, golly; looks like we have shades of Lincoln bedroom-type shenanigans. Jonah actually wrote that Bill Clinton wasn�t really our first black or feminist president, he was our first French president right down the mistress. If any of this can be verified, methinks we�ve found the real reason that Mr. Chirac is such a big fan of letting the inspectors do their job.
Pete Hamill finally loses it
I respect Pete Hamill. A long-time denizen of The City. Mr. Hamill is an erudite craftsman who genuinely understands the human condition and the frailty of life in a major metropolis. I read a piece back in the early 1990s in New York magazine (when my friend Steve Dubner was still there before he went to the NY Times). It was an article about the homeless in New York City and it was an order of magnitude better your standard hand-wringing guilt-fest. He pointed out that a significant segment were mentally ill substance abusers who didn�t need a hand out, they needed medical treatment. A big sub-segment of those folks were US Army veterans, for whom help was immediately available. He went on to lambaste so-called �homeless advocates� who were nothing more than enablers for bad behavior. Moreover, these homeless men � and they almost always were men � were a clear and present danger to themselves and other, substance abuse issues aside. They were contracting and spreading TB. And that�s a problem.
When I read that piece, I was astonished. Here was honest journalism that was both sympathetic and tough. Perhaps most importantly though � at least for me � it was devoid of the usual cliches generated by the New York media regarding the �homeless issue� during the time of a Republican president, in this case, George H.W. Bush.
I thought it brilliant and made a note to read Mr. Hamill at every opportunity.
Well, maybe I should stop. His piece in today�s NY Daily News equates the current buildup in around Iraq to the war planning being done prior to the First World War. Leaning heavily on Barbara Tuchman�s The Guns of August, Mr. Hamill devolves into a pontificating gasbag, implying the President isn't serious and/or doesn't understand the gravity of the situation he faces and, in order to remedy his ignorance, he needs to read Ms. Tuchman�s book.
August 1914 and the war against Saddam Hussein can't be truly compared, of course, since no war is exactly like any other war. But Tuchman's great book contains a universal lesson that must never be forgotten: Wars have consequences that cannot be predicted. Right up the road lies Iraq. This should be a quick, ferocious and certain victory. But after the victory, the true war might begin all over the planet, including here in our own tough city.
I watched the President the other night as he offered his sunny vision of leading a conquered Iraq into a new age of Pericles. The performance was astonishing. The tough guy sheriff was recasting himself into that ancient figure of Republican contempt: the do-gooder.
Reality seemed to have slipped away forever, and I wished that the President would go home and start reading "The Guns of August."
You�re right, Pete. The two can not be compared. As classical historian V.D. Hanson points out, unless your really defeat the enemy, he will rise back up and come looking for revenge. President Bush 41 didn�t understand where he was standing back then when he pulled the plug on our force on the road Baghdad. Neither did the French or the Brits in 1919. Which is exactly the reason the German Army was occupying France and the Luftwaffe was raining terror on the Coventry countryside just 22 years later.
And that�s why we�re back. And that�s why weapons inspectors � supported by the French both then and now � won�t work. President Bush 43 understands this. Perhaps he�s been reading about the Punic Wars � note the plural � and not Mr. Tuchman�s wonderful tome.
Yes, this is dangerous business, Pete. And it might not be as popular as appeasement. But it must be done.
A terrorist busted
I, for one, can breathe easier knowing that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is on his way from Pakistan to a Kuwaiti jail and into the hands of American �interrogators�. For those who don�t know or haven�t been exposed to any American media of any kind during the past 24 hours, allegedly, he planned the 9/11 WTC attacks.
This is a good thing. He is a murderous SOB and should be wrapped in bacon then set alight after we squeeze him dry. And it also shows that President Bush is also pursuing terrorists in addition to dealing with Iraq.
There is, however, a disturbing element to this story for the assembled Burls: he graduated from NC A&T in Greensburger. In the 1970s. While we were living there.
Housekeeping
All right, I give up. As of today, the New York experiment is being cancelled. The house is on the market and we�re showing it today. With any luck, we should be out of here in a month or so.
So why am I leaving? Some is personal and some is professional. My wife is sick of her two-hour commute in each direction. I�m sick of the traffic and congestion. My daughter is just sick from being in daycare.
So we�re moving back to Carolina. Guess I�ll need to change my moniker.
02 March 03 dpny
No comments:
Post a Comment