Chimper_Junta cancels elections. In Iraq, today. In America tomorrow. Or, Waiting For the Rapture.
(This little essay came to me from a friend, Gayle, who read the piece on a Web-Posted Newspaper in poodle Blair's GB.)
It may be a very rough ride if we go all the way with Bush
July 5 2003
America has the technology to wipe all life from the face of the planet. Maybe it will one day, writes Hugh Mackay. This week's news from Iraq might distress us, but perhaps it shouldn't surprise us. On the very brink of local elections that would have ushered in self-rule in provincial cities and towns across Iraq, US military commanders have called off the elections and installed their own hand-picked mayors and administrators, many of whom are former Iraqi military leaders.
It seems Iraqis will have to wait a while longer for their promised political miracle. George Bush has been as forceful and eloquent (????)* as our own Prime Minister in declaring that the war's purpose was to free Iraq from the yoke of Saddam, that the US has no territorial claims on Iraq, the war was never about oil, and the Iraqi people are now free to govern themselves in whatever way they choose.(????)*
Nice rhetoric; pity about the reality.
Notwithstanding all the rosy predictions about Iraq becoming the seedbed for the blossoming of democracy throughout the Middle East, it is clear the Iraqis will only be free to govern themselves on certain conditions imposed on them by Washington. This is a very particular version of democracy: "You can have your own government when we say you can, and then only if we approve." This looks like further support for the proposition that Washington never really had a clue about how it would manage Iraq once the invasion was over.
No wonder Iraqis are critical of the so-called "liberators", who now seem to be stifling the move towards self-government and who, according to The Washington Post, are fostering "a dependent, passive mindset among Iraqis and leaving no one but themselves to blame for the crime, faltering electricity and general misrule."
Meanwhile, militarily, Iraq is at risk of turning into the US equivalent of Russia's Afghanistan, with armed resistance continuing for years as a sullen reminder that not every Iraqi welcomed the occupation with unalloyed joy. So what has this got to do with us? A great deal, unfortunately. However much we might want to put Iraq behind us, we are inextricably bound to its present parlous situation by virtue of our enthusiastic participation in the invasion. Yes, we chose to leave before the work of reconstruction began, but the moral thread that still links us to Iraq can't simply be snapped by prime ministerial fiat. (What grotesque ethic inspired the PM's assertion that our responsibility ended with the military invasion?)
In spite of the accolades heaped on coalition troops, this will appear to have been a hollow victory if serious attention is not given to the urgent demands of the Iraqi people for self-government. Our own Government, into this thing up to its neck, should be agitating for that to happen. What, otherwise, was the point of our participation, now that the other grounds for the invasion appear to have collapsed? But this week has brought even more disturbing news than all that. The dark moral questions still hanging over Iraq are as nothing compared with those raised by the Bush Administration's determination to push on with its "space-bomb" program.
Frustrated by the difficulty of getting international support for its invasion of Iraq, Washington is now intent on developing weapons capable of being dropped from space, and from "reusable hypersonic cruise vehicles" controlled from its own territory, thus removing the need for bases to be established near enemy targets. This will bring armchair warfare a step closer: such weapons may finally break the already fragile moral nexus between warring nations. Somehow, Bush manages to balance his reputation as the most belligerent president the US has ever produced with his claim to be a born-again Christian. Such a cocktail of military might and religious fundamentalism is potentially lethal, so what will be our response to this latest phase in Washington's relentless development of weapons of mass destruction? Will our PM be urging his presidential buddy to recognise the madness of such plans, or are we to remain compliant allies, expected to be complicit in some future reign of terror?
Unless someone is prepared to call a halt to this crazy escalation, the black masterminds of the US weapons program may eventually devise their own "final solution". Will we, one day, learn of plans for massive thermonuclear devices, mounted on orbiting launch platforms, capable of devastating the entire planet? Logically, blowing everyone up(????)* is the only certain way of ridding the world of terrorists, despots and other assorted riffraff who don't happen to share the American dream.
You can imagine a Bush clone of the future, addressing the world via an international TV hook-up: "We've run out of patience. Today's the day. The Christians will go straight to heaven - the rest of you will just have to take your chances. Goodbye, and God bless."
Bang!
*Emphasis provided by NLTCP blog.
Hugh Mackay is an author and social researcher.
It may be a very rough ride if we go all the way with Bush
July 5 2003
America has the technology to wipe all life from the face of the planet. Maybe it will one day, writes Hugh Mackay. This week's news from Iraq might distress us, but perhaps it shouldn't surprise us. On the very brink of local elections that would have ushered in self-rule in provincial cities and towns across Iraq, US military commanders have called off the elections and installed their own hand-picked mayors and administrators, many of whom are former Iraqi military leaders.
It seems Iraqis will have to wait a while longer for their promised political miracle. George Bush has been as forceful and eloquent (????)* as our own Prime Minister in declaring that the war's purpose was to free Iraq from the yoke of Saddam, that the US has no territorial claims on Iraq, the war was never about oil, and the Iraqi people are now free to govern themselves in whatever way they choose.(????)*
Nice rhetoric; pity about the reality.
Notwithstanding all the rosy predictions about Iraq becoming the seedbed for the blossoming of democracy throughout the Middle East, it is clear the Iraqis will only be free to govern themselves on certain conditions imposed on them by Washington. This is a very particular version of democracy: "You can have your own government when we say you can, and then only if we approve." This looks like further support for the proposition that Washington never really had a clue about how it would manage Iraq once the invasion was over.
No wonder Iraqis are critical of the so-called "liberators", who now seem to be stifling the move towards self-government and who, according to The Washington Post, are fostering "a dependent, passive mindset among Iraqis and leaving no one but themselves to blame for the crime, faltering electricity and general misrule."
Meanwhile, militarily, Iraq is at risk of turning into the US equivalent of Russia's Afghanistan, with armed resistance continuing for years as a sullen reminder that not every Iraqi welcomed the occupation with unalloyed joy. So what has this got to do with us? A great deal, unfortunately. However much we might want to put Iraq behind us, we are inextricably bound to its present parlous situation by virtue of our enthusiastic participation in the invasion. Yes, we chose to leave before the work of reconstruction began, but the moral thread that still links us to Iraq can't simply be snapped by prime ministerial fiat. (What grotesque ethic inspired the PM's assertion that our responsibility ended with the military invasion?)
In spite of the accolades heaped on coalition troops, this will appear to have been a hollow victory if serious attention is not given to the urgent demands of the Iraqi people for self-government. Our own Government, into this thing up to its neck, should be agitating for that to happen. What, otherwise, was the point of our participation, now that the other grounds for the invasion appear to have collapsed? But this week has brought even more disturbing news than all that. The dark moral questions still hanging over Iraq are as nothing compared with those raised by the Bush Administration's determination to push on with its "space-bomb" program.
Frustrated by the difficulty of getting international support for its invasion of Iraq, Washington is now intent on developing weapons capable of being dropped from space, and from "reusable hypersonic cruise vehicles" controlled from its own territory, thus removing the need for bases to be established near enemy targets. This will bring armchair warfare a step closer: such weapons may finally break the already fragile moral nexus between warring nations. Somehow, Bush manages to balance his reputation as the most belligerent president the US has ever produced with his claim to be a born-again Christian. Such a cocktail of military might and religious fundamentalism is potentially lethal, so what will be our response to this latest phase in Washington's relentless development of weapons of mass destruction? Will our PM be urging his presidential buddy to recognise the madness of such plans, or are we to remain compliant allies, expected to be complicit in some future reign of terror?
Unless someone is prepared to call a halt to this crazy escalation, the black masterminds of the US weapons program may eventually devise their own "final solution". Will we, one day, learn of plans for massive thermonuclear devices, mounted on orbiting launch platforms, capable of devastating the entire planet? Logically, blowing everyone up(????)* is the only certain way of ridding the world of terrorists, despots and other assorted riffraff who don't happen to share the American dream.
You can imagine a Bush clone of the future, addressing the world via an international TV hook-up: "We've run out of patience. Today's the day. The Christians will go straight to heaven - the rest of you will just have to take your chances. Goodbye, and God bless."
Bang!
*Emphasis provided by NLTCP blog.
Hugh Mackay is an author and social researcher.
posted by A. J. Franklin @ 13:42
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home