|
Compare & Contrast
October 2003
After having set fire to the
civilized world in the Middle East, the Bush men seem to be having second
thoughts about the sanity of that policy, at least as far as that policy
might be able to go in the 'old' Far East.
In the opening chapter of the
War-on-the-World; we were all told that the USA would go-it-alone, because
we knew best about what to do, and when and how to do things, when faced
with threats from an "Axis of Evil. " And so we implemented
naked aggression and the wanton slaughter of a degenerating state, that
actually posed no problems (no proof to the contrary having ever been
found as of this date - in stark contrast to the lies that are still being
repeated to justify this act) - to anyone but themselves.
In Chapter Two of our
WAR-on-the-WORLD, Team bush is seeking to modify the US position somewhat.
This time we are dealing with North Korea who does possess and is
threatening to use, nuclear weapons unless we sign a non-aggression Treaty
with them. But if we do that we would be acting alone (just as we did in
Iraq), and apparently we don't want to do that in the Far East. Instead we
want an agreement - basically a letter between China, Japan, South Korea,
the US and North Korea, that could be "gotten around" if things
get ugly. Also this would not require Senate confirmation of our
intentions. Why the change?
On the surface we appear to want
to be involved with others - in reality we're simply seeking cover for the
failures of our non-existent diplomatic efforts. And, because there is an
election coming up, Bush cannot afford to be seen as having alienated the
entire world with his maniacal grand designs on Empire. But the real
questions this raises are about our willingness to continue to believe
that we can actually rule the entire planet - alone.
It is also very interesting that
we are losing our former dominance in the Far East to China; and that
China and India (both nuclear powers themselves), have now joined with the
developing nations against US interests in the last summit of global
financial interests held in Cancun, Mexico: A meeting that ended in
failure and frustration for the US for our continued totalitarian approach
to trade and economics in the world. We like to call this Free Trade.
So now, in the Far East, the
Bushite's are trying to 'appear' conciliatory, interested in the whole
region, bla, bla, bla. We have no idea how to deal with North Korea and the
continuing threat that it posses, just at the time when we're about to have
an election. This becomes pivotal because elections here tend to force a
re-examination of the events in the previous four years.
And this kind of an examination is
not something the administration wants to allow as they appear to be
completely bereft of common sense, of diplomacy, and most of all as having
been conducted at the expense of all the other nations and interests on
the planet.
Team Bush currently is looking at
a track record that has turned a willfully blind eye on anything that
might examine the causes of the attack, the attack itself on 911, or the
aftermath, in practical terms. In addition the record of the
Bush-Cheney-Sharon administration, includes all kinds of business scandals
and horrendous corruptions that were undreamt of before this Cabal came
into office.
Ninety percent of which have
still not been addressed either. When one adds in the job losses, the
bankrupting of the Treasury, the skyrocketing American debt, not to
mention the siege which the Cabal has instituted to eliminate American
jobs of any value. Then the sum total of this administration's
contributions; toward the health and viability of the American landscape
of:
"Life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness."
Begins to look more like
"Death, slavery and the pursuit of self-destruction."
Than anything remotely connected
to "The American Dream."
So watch for the coming summit of
"The Big 5" to be more about China, Japan, and South Korea, not
becoming "Old" like their European counterparts - but instead
choosing to capitulate to US demands for accessions to what works for
Little-Big-Mouth, in this, his time of political need.
Why should we not sign a Treaty
with North Korea? Bush says that's "because it's not just between us
- it's about all the nations in the region." And of course it is: but
why is this different from Iraq? Iraq is not just something for us to deal
with - that's why the United Nations was looked to - it had to do with oil
and that has to do with the whole world, not even just that region of the
planet. Yet we maintained (and still do) that we know best, and we're not
going to share the goodies, only the costs and the burdens.
Bush and Company cannot have it
both ways, nor can they carve out little exceptions when it suits them -
they simply are not that sophisticated. They conned the UN into signing a
resolution, but it is an empty document on its face. The looked for money
and troops are still not materializing. Apparently a war upon the world is
not part of most people's idea of what they should be dedicating their
time and treasure to support.
Would that a reality check in
Washington D.C. - might be forthcoming sooner, rather than after it is too
late!
kirwan
Back to top of page
|