Does this sound reasonable to you?
Dear Mr. President;
The Free Market Capitalism Coalition urges you to stop our country�s move towards economic isolationism. Only by liberalizing global trade and finance laws can we improve worldwide market access. Only through establishing fluid access to multi-national markets can investment flow into developing countries. And it is this market building that creates jobs and raises living standards in so-called underdeveloped countries around the world.
We all know that our national security strategy is in part based on the promolgation of increased global economic growth through free markets and free trade. Our coalition believes the United States must continue to open economic barriers to allow for a more global oriented trading community. Less open/fortunate societies than ours are in the process of climbing out of poverty by following the ideals and practices of modified free market capitalism. Their level of poverty decreases as a direct result of American influence on their business communities and government leaders. The economic freedom that results from increase commercial activity will unleash the potential of their people and assure their future prosperity. Please do not allow the retreat of American values and freedoms from the distant frontiers where democracy meets fascism and anarchy. Nations that choose to share our political and economic beliefs can share in the freedom that occurs in their societies after embracing democratic capitalism giving their people liberties and freedoms never before experienced.
America works, on any number of levels. People vote with their feet. Immigration to America is a common goal through the world. A misguided attempt at pushing an "America for Americans" doctrine will ultimately damage America and American business in some specific sector economies -- sectors like software development and medical processes. But the adverse effects of increased U.S. isolationism will created a festering breeding ground for terrorist networks and drug lords. Before long, the United States is a target for the �have nots� who view our blessed country as an evil, gluttonous empire determined to keep out those less fortunate.
American isolationism has also serious economic repercussions not only on countries trying to improve their societies but on ours as well. One example of the effects of isolationism would have is the decline of customers in leisure and business travel industries in the United States. American airlines are under great financial pressures to maintain affordable fares, while taking on substantial security expenses since 9/11. The leisure industry is taking a direct hit by airline decisions as are other industries such as cruise lines. Peripheral support industries to the leisure industry like food suppliers, travel agencies, hotels, and many others are also experiencing cutbacks in personnel. The effect of isolationism, were the Executive Branch to publicly announce and support a cultural shift in that direction, would have a devastating effect across the entire leisure and luxury travel sectors.
The Free Market Capitalism Coalition believes that a move towards isolationism would ultimately have dire consequences for the United States. Travel agencies and airlines would be nothing short of crippled. The United States is at risk of being seen as a rich, snobbish, selfish, �have� country, and our people and culture will pay this cost of retreating from the world. Trade across all societies can bring peoples together and increase mutual awareness of the differences and similarities between diverse cultures. It helps to educate less fortunate people around the world to better understand the freedoms and privileges we enjoy in America and inspires them to try and achieve the same objective through commerce, not terrorism. Likewise, Americans are further educated in the richness of the cultural diversity that exists on the planet which brings a further awareness to our people of the issues that the rest of world cares about and our society sometimes forgets, such as environmental issues and the spread of pandemic diseases.
In closing, the Free Market Capitalism Coalition would like to state that we are behind you and the government of the United States, the greatest society the world has ever seen. We believe it is through our unique constitution that our people have experienced a standard of living that will not be seen again on this earth. We also believe that through isolationism, the United States risks alienating the entire world against our society, creating an "us vs. them" cultural schism which can be seen manifesting itself in countries that do not have access to our markets today. We need to open those markets, militarily if need be, to allow commerce to reign across the globe.
Respectfully,
Ralph of the Burls
You see - I'm not sure that this is not what got us into the problem in the first place.
Saturday, March 08, 2003
Jonah the genius strikes again�Maureen Dowd is losing her edge�househunting in �the Provinces�
I think Jonah�s Goldberg�s is the best and the freshest in the marketplace of ideas. Charming, witty, and unafraid of confrontation, his body of work is starting to show flashes of genius. His lasting posting is the closest thing I�ve ever found to a Rosetta Stone explaining why liberals /�our reluctant European allies� think the way they do. It is not to be missed.
Maureen Dowd has lost her edge
Maureen Dowd, the aging doyenne of the NY Times editorial board, seems to have lost her edge.
That or I�m tired of her continuous bitching about �the Bushies�. I suppose though, if you�re a one trick pony and that one trick keeps you in a nice place on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, there is an incentive to do it over and over again.
Her latest piece in America�s so-called �newspaper of record� is actually setup to deliver interesting and profound insights into George Bush fils understanding of America�s place in the world and how the ascension of American culture places it on the same short list as the Roman and Chinese Empire. She could then underscore the differences between those empires of conquest and our empire of thought and freedom.
Heavy sigh
Alas, she didn�t, deciding that the best way to conduct a reasoned argument was to lead with facts, then make a unreasonable summation coupled with an ad hominem attack. The text of the piece concerns a Pentogon study of the empires of yore � China, Rome, etc. and how they keep and spread their influence and power. Personally, I think this perfectly reasonable, even laudable, use of taxpayer money. American policy makers should study history. They should understand that the world is a very dangerous place. They � and us � would be wise to study everything that�s ever happened before and learn form it. Ms. Dowd concludes that this is another example of misguided Republicans striving to enslave the world with our petit bourgeois values and tastes (read �life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness�). Money quote:
I don�t think I can quite make the synaptical leap between the study of history during dangerous times and desire for empire. Indeed, it was a careful study of history that allowed American forces to quickly overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan. We didn�t repeat the tactics of either The British of the Soviets, both of whom really were bent on empire. And somehow I do find it reassuring that we have yet to receive the blessing of our nationalist /socialist �allies� in old Europe.
House hunting
I�m in Carolina, hanging out with my sister and her husband, looking for a house. The New South seems to have learned that much of its� charm cam from its Old South roots. No, not Jim Crow politics or confederate flags, but grace and rooted-ness. Charleston is charming. So is Savannah. The architecture is familiar and comfortable.
Well, developers in Raleigh have finally figured that out and are building new neighborhoods that like, well, old neighborhoods. Development after development is being built to look like Craftsman bungalows or Charleston row houses.
And I am stoked. Let the hunting begin.
08 Mar 03 dpny
I think Jonah�s Goldberg�s is the best and the freshest in the marketplace of ideas. Charming, witty, and unafraid of confrontation, his body of work is starting to show flashes of genius. His lasting posting is the closest thing I�ve ever found to a Rosetta Stone explaining why liberals /�our reluctant European allies� think the way they do. It is not to be missed.
Maureen Dowd has lost her edge
Maureen Dowd, the aging doyenne of the NY Times editorial board, seems to have lost her edge.
That or I�m tired of her continuous bitching about �the Bushies�. I suppose though, if you�re a one trick pony and that one trick keeps you in a nice place on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, there is an incentive to do it over and over again.
Her latest piece in America�s so-called �newspaper of record� is actually setup to deliver interesting and profound insights into George Bush fils understanding of America�s place in the world and how the ascension of American culture places it on the same short list as the Roman and Chinese Empire. She could then underscore the differences between those empires of conquest and our empire of thought and freedom.
Heavy sigh
Alas, she didn�t, deciding that the best way to conduct a reasoned argument was to lead with facts, then make a unreasonable summation coupled with an ad hominem attack. The text of the piece concerns a Pentogon study of the empires of yore � China, Rome, etc. and how they keep and spread their influence and power. Personally, I think this perfectly reasonable, even laudable, use of taxpayer money. American policy makers should study history. They should understand that the world is a very dangerous place. They � and us � would be wise to study everything that�s ever happened before and learn form it. Ms. Dowd concludes that this is another example of misguided Republicans striving to enslave the world with our petit bourgeois values and tastes (read �life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness�). Money quote:
As the brazen Bush imperialists try to install a new democracy in Iraq, they are finding the old democracy of our reluctant allies inconvenient.
I don�t think I can quite make the synaptical leap between the study of history during dangerous times and desire for empire. Indeed, it was a careful study of history that allowed American forces to quickly overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan. We didn�t repeat the tactics of either The British of the Soviets, both of whom really were bent on empire. And somehow I do find it reassuring that we have yet to receive the blessing of our nationalist /socialist �allies� in old Europe.
House hunting
I�m in Carolina, hanging out with my sister and her husband, looking for a house. The New South seems to have learned that much of its� charm cam from its Old South roots. No, not Jim Crow politics or confederate flags, but grace and rooted-ness. Charleston is charming. So is Savannah. The architecture is familiar and comfortable.
Well, developers in Raleigh have finally figured that out and are building new neighborhoods that like, well, old neighborhoods. Development after development is being built to look like Craftsman bungalows or Charleston row houses.
And I am stoked. Let the hunting begin.
08 Mar 03 dpny
Wednesday, March 05, 2003
A comprehensive case for finishing our War with Iraq
SunTzu, The Art of War
It all comes down to this: do you pull the trigger or not? When everything has been said, when all the arguments made, one must sit down and actively reason whether the US should wage war with the nation of Iraq.
It�s beyond Saddam Hussein. It�s beyond UN Resolution 1441. It�s beyond any allies the US may or may not have. The point that General Sun Tzu made all those centuries ago still resonates: war is serious and should not be conducted frivolously.
There are those amongst the body politic who demand increased arm inspections as a means to prevent war. There are those amongst the body politic who state that President Bush has not made the case for war, ergo it should not be waged. There are some in the body politic that claim that this is all about oil, and that President Bush, being a former oil executive, is only concerned about looting Iraq�s natural resources. Some of his more vociferous domestic opponents state that this is just a distraction for the administration�s failed attempts to get Osama Bin Ladin (OBL) and his executive henchmen. Some overseas claim that we are either being manipulated by Israel and the �Zionist lobby�, or engaged in the colonial aggregation often associated with the European empires of two centuries ago. Some even claim that this is all personal, just a blood feud between the Arab Saddam and WASP-y, patrician Bushes of Kennebunkeport.
To that I say: �hogwash.�
Saddam Hussein is a dangerous hoodlum who has fashioned Stalinist dictatorship that has its boot on the neck of the Iraqi people. He has started wars that killed millions. He has used poison gas on his own citizens. He actively subsidizes terrorism around the world.
No serious person can deny any of that. Indeed, that�s been the case for years. So why now? Why should America risk blood and treasure to dispose of a tin pot dictator?
It all comes back to Gen. Tzu: survival or ruin.
This war is really is about survival. Not oil. Not Israel. Not distraction. Not empire.
To understand why it�s not about those things, one simply has to look at arguments.
It�s about oil
Let�s say, for the sake of argument, that President Bush decreed tomorrow that all vehicles in the US must run on ethanol or bio-diesel. That we were never going to import any oil ever again. That we were going to start a crash course designed to end petroleum use in the US forever. Where would that leave us?
Saddam would still have lots of money. He would still have weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). He would still have a proclivity to use them. And he would still hate the US.
Even if we didn�t need the oil ever again, he would still want to kill every American reading this sentence. His motive or means will not go away even if we ran our economy on hay.
It�s about Israel
Israel has won every conventional war it has ever fought and can take care of itself. Everybody thinks they have their own nukes and would use them if they were ever attacked by anybody with a WMD. The Palestinian issue is resolving itself, with the Israeli Army attacking terrorist networks with tanks and midnight raids. Indeed, I have contended for years that if the Palestinians would simply change tactics � embrace Gandhi or Martin Luther King instead of Fidel Castro or Yassir Arafat � they would already have their state.
Israel is indeed an ally in the region. No one can deny that. However, they can account for themselves quite well on any field of battle. They don�t need us to fight their battles for them.
It�s just a distraction
The capture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed in Pakistan � Al Qaeda�s operations chief� utterly refutes this argument that President Bush is simply using Iraq to distract the American people for the incompetent job his administration is doing in capturing OBL and destroying his terrorist network. Having been on the FBI�s most wanted list for a decade, he has sponsored, organized and planned terrorist activity all over the world.
We got him. He�s squealing. His rank and file will be vacationing in Cuba at Guantanimo Bay soon enough.
Sorry. President Bush can walk and chew gum at the same time.
It�s about empire
Arguments can be made that American became an Imperial Power in the latter days of the 19th Century with the annexation of The Philippines and Cuba. Okay, fair enough. But they�re both independent now. The same is true for the territories we conquered in Europe and Asia during the World War (parts 1 and 2). Afghanistan is free. Kuwait is free. Panama is free. Kosovo is free. I contend that the Europeans who carp that our war with Iraq is about empire are simply projecting their sorry histories onto us.
No, Iraq will be a free and democratic state before you know it. And will have a destabilizing effect on all those mullahs and sheiks living within broadcast range.
After 9/11, the President�s critics � made up almost entirely of those who thought Al Gore should really be the president � wondered how the attack could have occurred. �How come nobody could connect the dots?�, so many passionately intoned. Hearings were demanded and held. Bureaucracies were dis- and re- assembled. The Taliban were overthrown. Al Qaeda was pursued. Things were going along swimmingly.
Then, President Bush started talking about the �axis of evil�. He mentioned Iraq by name. The critics pounced. The usual suspects chanted the usual homilies. The subject was changed at every opportunity.
They didn�t connect the dots.
They argued for more inspections. They argued that Bush was stupid. They banged their spoon on their high chairs when people criticized their criticisms. They charged �McCarthy-ism�.
But Sen. Joe McCarthy was right. There were Soviet spies in the State Department. Stalin's lackeys were in Hollywood. Sure, McCarthy's tactics were evil, falsely accusing some and insidiously implying guilt by association. But the core of his arguments were correct. The Ethel and Julius Rosenberg were guilty. So was Alger Hiss. The Soviets got the H-bomb given to them. All this has been verified through disclassified Soviet intelligence made public 10 years ago.
The usual suspects didn�t connect the dots then, either.
What 9/11 did for the Bush Administration is connect the dots. The policy of containing Saddam actually worked as long as he didn�t have a delivery vehicle for all those terrible weapons we know he has. He literally didn�t have a missile that could reach the US. That was his problem.
On 9/11, we realized that he didn�t have to develop a missile program. He could have all the missiles he wanted and book tickets for them online with a credit card.
That�s when the Bush Administration connected the last dot. His critics still have not.
This is serious. And it is about survival.
05 Mar 03 dpny
�War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin��
SunTzu, The Art of War
It all comes down to this: do you pull the trigger or not? When everything has been said, when all the arguments made, one must sit down and actively reason whether the US should wage war with the nation of Iraq.
It�s beyond Saddam Hussein. It�s beyond UN Resolution 1441. It�s beyond any allies the US may or may not have. The point that General Sun Tzu made all those centuries ago still resonates: war is serious and should not be conducted frivolously.
There are those amongst the body politic who demand increased arm inspections as a means to prevent war. There are those amongst the body politic who state that President Bush has not made the case for war, ergo it should not be waged. There are some in the body politic that claim that this is all about oil, and that President Bush, being a former oil executive, is only concerned about looting Iraq�s natural resources. Some of his more vociferous domestic opponents state that this is just a distraction for the administration�s failed attempts to get Osama Bin Ladin (OBL) and his executive henchmen. Some overseas claim that we are either being manipulated by Israel and the �Zionist lobby�, or engaged in the colonial aggregation often associated with the European empires of two centuries ago. Some even claim that this is all personal, just a blood feud between the Arab Saddam and WASP-y, patrician Bushes of Kennebunkeport.
To that I say: �hogwash.�
Saddam Hussein is a dangerous hoodlum who has fashioned Stalinist dictatorship that has its boot on the neck of the Iraqi people. He has started wars that killed millions. He has used poison gas on his own citizens. He actively subsidizes terrorism around the world.
No serious person can deny any of that. Indeed, that�s been the case for years. So why now? Why should America risk blood and treasure to dispose of a tin pot dictator?
It all comes back to Gen. Tzu: survival or ruin.
This war is really is about survival. Not oil. Not Israel. Not distraction. Not empire.
To understand why it�s not about those things, one simply has to look at arguments.
It�s about oil
Let�s say, for the sake of argument, that President Bush decreed tomorrow that all vehicles in the US must run on ethanol or bio-diesel. That we were never going to import any oil ever again. That we were going to start a crash course designed to end petroleum use in the US forever. Where would that leave us?
Saddam would still have lots of money. He would still have weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). He would still have a proclivity to use them. And he would still hate the US.
Even if we didn�t need the oil ever again, he would still want to kill every American reading this sentence. His motive or means will not go away even if we ran our economy on hay.
It�s about Israel
Israel has won every conventional war it has ever fought and can take care of itself. Everybody thinks they have their own nukes and would use them if they were ever attacked by anybody with a WMD. The Palestinian issue is resolving itself, with the Israeli Army attacking terrorist networks with tanks and midnight raids. Indeed, I have contended for years that if the Palestinians would simply change tactics � embrace Gandhi or Martin Luther King instead of Fidel Castro or Yassir Arafat � they would already have their state.
Israel is indeed an ally in the region. No one can deny that. However, they can account for themselves quite well on any field of battle. They don�t need us to fight their battles for them.
It�s just a distraction
The capture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed in Pakistan � Al Qaeda�s operations chief� utterly refutes this argument that President Bush is simply using Iraq to distract the American people for the incompetent job his administration is doing in capturing OBL and destroying his terrorist network. Having been on the FBI�s most wanted list for a decade, he has sponsored, organized and planned terrorist activity all over the world.
We got him. He�s squealing. His rank and file will be vacationing in Cuba at Guantanimo Bay soon enough.
Sorry. President Bush can walk and chew gum at the same time.
It�s about empire
Arguments can be made that American became an Imperial Power in the latter days of the 19th Century with the annexation of The Philippines and Cuba. Okay, fair enough. But they�re both independent now. The same is true for the territories we conquered in Europe and Asia during the World War (parts 1 and 2). Afghanistan is free. Kuwait is free. Panama is free. Kosovo is free. I contend that the Europeans who carp that our war with Iraq is about empire are simply projecting their sorry histories onto us.
No, Iraq will be a free and democratic state before you know it. And will have a destabilizing effect on all those mullahs and sheiks living within broadcast range.
After 9/11, the President�s critics � made up almost entirely of those who thought Al Gore should really be the president � wondered how the attack could have occurred. �How come nobody could connect the dots?�, so many passionately intoned. Hearings were demanded and held. Bureaucracies were dis- and re- assembled. The Taliban were overthrown. Al Qaeda was pursued. Things were going along swimmingly.
Then, President Bush started talking about the �axis of evil�. He mentioned Iraq by name. The critics pounced. The usual suspects chanted the usual homilies. The subject was changed at every opportunity.
They didn�t connect the dots.
They argued for more inspections. They argued that Bush was stupid. They banged their spoon on their high chairs when people criticized their criticisms. They charged �McCarthy-ism�.
But Sen. Joe McCarthy was right. There were Soviet spies in the State Department. Stalin's lackeys were in Hollywood. Sure, McCarthy's tactics were evil, falsely accusing some and insidiously implying guilt by association. But the core of his arguments were correct. The Ethel and Julius Rosenberg were guilty. So was Alger Hiss. The Soviets got the H-bomb given to them. All this has been verified through disclassified Soviet intelligence made public 10 years ago.
The usual suspects didn�t connect the dots then, either.
What 9/11 did for the Bush Administration is connect the dots. The policy of containing Saddam actually worked as long as he didn�t have a delivery vehicle for all those terrible weapons we know he has. He literally didn�t have a missile that could reach the US. That was his problem.
On 9/11, we realized that he didn�t have to develop a missile program. He could have all the missiles he wanted and book tickets for them online with a credit card.
That�s when the Bush Administration connected the last dot. His critics still have not.
This is serious. And it is about survival.
05 Mar 03 dpny
Sunday, March 02, 2003
The French as Iraqi stooges�Pete Hamill finally blows a gasket�Another rat busted�Housekeeping, sort of.
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:
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.
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)