March 12
Well, it's hard to think about much
else but the increasing sense of turmoil in the world, in large part,
centering primarily around the Impending US attack on Iraq.
Reader reply to my March 11
concerns about US-Canada relations rant...
" I
read your journal article about the US and I respect your point of
view.
However, as an educated
American, with a decent brain, a desire for the
truth and a sense of
perspective, let me offer an alternative view.
First, America is
blessed with many things, including a oceans on our
coast, decent neighbors
on our borders and vast resources, So, our
views tend to be very
USA-centric. That's not good or bad, just the
way it is.
At the moment, the
people don't really pick the leaders of this
country. The parties
pick and fund the candidates and, when it's all
said and done, it's
either going to be a Republican or Democrat. So,
we don't always get the
best and the brightest.
Right now we have Bush
which, in my opinion, is a result of a middle
class backlash against
Democrats. History, I believe, will show that
Bush will be an awful
president as have been most recent Republicans
have.
After all, politics is
about money and power and making rich people
rich. And, that's the
issue right there.
Much of what the
Republicans are doing is typical for Republicans.
Bush's father ran the
CIA. So, is it a surprise as to what he is doing
regarding personal
freedom in the US?
But, the real issue I
think is people and money. Hussein is a dictator
who has taken over the
Iraq and ruined the lives of the people there.
He's worth $30 billion
and doesn't want to lose control of his
ill-gotten empire. He
has these weapons to hold the region hostage.
The issue in not
religion or politics there...it's just money.
Poverty and despair are
the breeding grounds for anger and hate. Give
hope in Iraq
self-determination and a country to build and terrorism
would fall by the way.
Look at post-war Japan for an example of that.
But, in think the most
frustrating thing happening right now from an
American citizen's
point of view is what is going on in the United
Nations. France,
Germany, Russia and China are basically blocking the
US from taking action
against one of the countries that facilitated an
attack in our homeland.
The US has the right to strike back...and it
should, lest it be seen
by the Muslim world as weak.
But, why would
America's former allies turn against it? Well, France
makes billions by
reselling Iraqi oil under the "Oil for Food" program.
Germany sells Iraq
chemicals, including Potassium Cyanide, a precursor
to cyanide gas, and
also sells the technical equipment for their
'research' programs.
Hussein owes Russia $8 billion, that is wants
back, and China sells
weapons, technology and built their underground
weapons plants.
So, if there is a real
inspection, these countries will be 'outed'. If
there is a war, they
lose money. If they can delay the US, the heat
will cause the US to
have casualties from the heat as it's tough to
live in a biohazard
suit in the desert in the summer.
As for the war, the
bottom line issue is that the US is a nation that
is entitled to strike
back for acts of war. The UN is acting based on
economics and is
challenging the US's right to act.
The real risk is that
the UN will be seen as useless as the US will
pull out.
There is only one
superpower left in the world right now...and that's
the US. I can
understand how other countries could be uneasy. And,
leaders are people
seeking money and power.
But, the fact of this
matter is that Hussein is an evil dictator that
has already committed
genocide. The US has already been attacked and
has the right to
respond. The UN is blocking the US because of
economic interests.
If you think the US is
evil, the people are evil or that we are trying
to take over the world,
you are entitled to that opinion. But, I
disagree and think that
it's not consistent with the facts.
Spend some time over
this way. Hang out. Read more. Learn more..and
I bet you'll feel
better.
Plus, wait til next
election. Bush won't be re-elected..and that will
be a good thing too.
"
The only thing that I
don't relate to in this respondents letter, is that area in which the
UN, myself, and others, don't feel that the US was attacked by 'Iraq'
and has a right to retaliate on the 'Country of Iraq'. The US
was attacked by a terrorist group, that may or may not have been fully
or partially funded by one very corrupt man. Should the world
and the US be working towards persecuting the terrorists and those who
funded them, yes. Should they be acting without good proof that
this is for certain the case, or retaliating in an act of war towards
and entire country full of innocents... well, my humble opine and that
of the UN currently, is no. Is it likely that this person is
responsible, and likely that they have weapons of mass destruction...
yes. But acting simply on 'belief' is simply not good
enough. Why, because it does set a dangerous precedent. If
the UN or other countries, support a countries decision to attack
another country based on the -possibility- that they may have done
something, or may have something, is really a rather disturbing
concept.
I have never been a
person who follows world politics very closely, I haven't done a lot
of research into these areas, this is perhaps the most savvy I've ever
been in terms of being aware of what political struggles are in the
public eye. I have spent a fair bit of time in the US (I have a
brother who lives in San Fran, and friends in a number of places) and
I have other... first hand observations, particularly about striking
race relations issues that we don't see the same...
stratification/discrimination in as outright a fashion here in Canada
(discrimination and prejudice is everywhere, it just doesn't present
itself quite as overtly as some of the ways I've seen across the
border). I definitely don't feel the people in the US are
evil, or the US as a whole, culturally is evil, in terms of political
systems... well, I'm not so sure, mind you, I think our own is pretty
fucked too. The money making big business driven political..
monster, that in many ways, originates perhaps at least in part, from
US culture, is not a pretty thing, and I think evil may be a word I'd
apply to it. Unfortunately, it is a driving force, it is this
aspect that constitutes the 'world power' and effects people in the
US, and the entire world. I think if I was a US citizen, I would
likely feel similar (as I said, I have similar issues with my own
country). I think the influence and power the US has, makes it a
force to be reckoned with, and makes it at times, potentially as
something, conceptually, symbolically, sadly and unfortunately... scary.
The difficulty with
educating oneself more on topics such as these, is the propaganda
machines that are always in the works. Any information we get is
often supplied from sources who have specific interests or motives or
beliefs associated with the situation, which means, it's often
misleading. One can only try to gather information from a
variety of sources, and listen carefully to what is actually being
said, and make as educated a decision as possible, while keeping to
one's own beliefs and values.
Here's one other little
tidbit I found online, and interesting:
"March
11 2003
A veteran US diplomat
resigned today in protest over US policy toward Iraq, becoming the
second career foreign service officer to do so in the past month.
John Brown, who joined
the State Department in 1981, said he resigned because he could not
support Washington's Iraq policy, which he said was fomenting a
massive rise in anti-US sentiment around the world.
In a resignation letter
to Secretary of State Colin Powell, Brown said he agreed with J Brady
Kiesling, a diplomat at the US embassy in Athens who quit in February
over President George W Bush's apparent intent on fighting Iraq.
"I am joining my
colleague John Brady Kiesling in submitting my resignation from the
Foreign Service - effective immediately - because I cannot in good
conscience support President Bush's war plans against Iraq," he
said.
"Throughout the
globe the United States is becoming associated with the unjustified
use of force," Brown said in the letter, a copy of which he sent
to AFP.
"The president's
disregard for views in other nations, borne out by his neglect of
public diplomacy, is giving birth to an anti-American century,"
he said.
"I joined the
Foreign Service because I love our country," Brown said.
"Respectfully, Mr Secretary, I am now bringing this calling to a
close, with a heavy heart but for the same reason that I embraced
it."
Two senior State
Department officials confirmed that Powell had received the letter
from Brown, who had served at the US embassies in London, Prague,
Krakow, Kiev, Belgrade and Moscow before being assigned to be a
diplomat-in-residence at Georgetown University in Washington.
Brown and Kiesling are
believed to be the only US diplomats to have resigned from the foreign
service over Iraq to date. "
I think I found the
above letter of resignation interesting, because he hones in right on
the sentiment that I think I was trying to capture that is seems to be
growing in the minds and hearts of many Canadians. It worries
me, I -know- that most Americans are caring respecting intelligent
individuals. With this move on the part of US government, I
think the global view, Canada included, is going to be become
increasingly -anti-US- which is incredibly unfortunate for my friends
across the border.
Another spot...
"The horrible events of
September 11, 2001, shocked everyone. Everyone knew that something
must be done to stop international terrorism. With the support of many
Americans, President Bush started a war in Afghanistan, against the
Taliban government there.
Many of President Bush's
advisors had hoped that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had been behind
the terrorism. They've been obsessing over him for over a decade and
wanted an excuse to re-start the Persian Gulf War. But there is no
link of Iraq with Osama bin Laden. But in 2002, the American people
are still rattled by the destruction of the World Trade Center towers
and part of the Pentagon. They are afraid that the U.S. still hasn't
found Osama bin Laden.
There are many in the Bush
Administration who want to use this fear to start a war against Iraq
anyway. Remember: there is absolutely no connection between
Iraq and the September 11th terrorists and absolutely nothing has
changed between Iraq and the United States for years. But Bush is
apparently planning a war anyway. Troop buildups are starting and a
war could start later this year. To do so will require that he come up
with reasons for a war, and so we can expect to see him provoke
Hussein. President George W. Bush will also need to convince the rest
of the world that another war is needed, and this will be tough.
What Else is Going On?
Saddam Hussein is not the only world leader with weapons of mass
destruction. There are plenty of countries with even more lethal
nuclear weapons including the U.S., Russian, the Ukraine, China,
France, Britain, South Africa, India, and Pakistan. Most notably,
Israel has also undertaken a nuclear program and they certainly have a
small arsenal with missiles capable of reaching Iraq. It is arguable
that their development of atomic weapons upped the ante in the Middle
East Arms race and helped fuel Hussein's development of chemical and
biological weapons, the "poor man's nuclear weapon." Yet the
United Nations and U.S. Presidents have never proposed bombing Israel
or any of the other countries for their weapons of mass destruction.
There is very much a double-standard going on with regards to
Iraq."
The
Federation of American Scientists has some good neutral
information, and at the bottom of this page, links for sites with good
information, what I find interesting, is the category they have for
links... there doesn't seem to be a pro-war section, other than the US
Govt. section.
I also found this
little article interesting.
I'm not trying to 'US
Bash' I'm trying.. to express a growing unease the world is
feeling towards this super power, particularly since 9-11. The
us and them mentality that came off to many as the US bullying other
countries to either give them money and other aid in their war on
terrorism, or be counted as 'on the side of the terrorists'. Again,
even in the sentiment of the respondent who wrote back to me, that
former US allies have turned against them. In the respondents
mind, now, because they do not agree and support the US in a
pre-emptive strike war, they are no longer allies, they are 'former'
allies. Perhaps he, and others, should wonder a little harder,
at why the majority of the world's countries are not 'supporting' this
war. Is it really the economic factors he stated? Is it
really all it is. I have nothing invested, economically or
otherwise in Iraq... but I honestly don't think declaring war on the
country of Iraq is justified, and certainly, far from ethical.
I'm not siding with Iraq, I'm not against the US, I'm anti-war given
this particular set of circumstances. The circumstances being
the same between any two countries, my own included, would not change
my opinion.









