The Tangled Web of War
By John Cory
TO correspondent in Saudi Arabia
Wednesday 05 February 2003
Bush and company have solidified their 1950's "Father Knows Best" brand of politics while the corporate media has become nothing more than a TV Guide listing service with "pick of the week" recommendations.
As Colin Powell prepares to address the UN with "new" strong evidence, it is hard not to be cynical in response.
A recent story from Newsweek about intercepted "conversations" of Iraqi leaders bragging and chuckling over hiding weapons from UN Inspectors has to be viewed with some suspicion. Was this story "leaked" to Isikoff and company by the White House? Even while at the same time spinning that no "smoking gun" would be revealed, but the preponderance of evidence would be presented in both historical and current context that cannot be denied. Sort of like the impeachment techniques from the Clinton years, isn't it? Wasn't Isikoff involved in that too?
Here in the Middle East, the audience is already skeptical, to put it mildly. People from Jordan and Egypt and the UAE have assumed that fabrication is the technique in vogue from this administration because Bush wants his war. Bush in their eyes, has picked Iraq precisely because it is weakened from the previous war and a decade of sanctions. Everyone reminds me that most Arab military organizations are looked upon as "less than" their western counterparts. And because the US and others have spent decades profiting from the sale of weaponry in this part of the world, Bush and company are in the perfect position to know who would be the easiest target to decimate without heavy casualties. Thus making the US and Bush appear strong and invincible to anyone else who might object to American policies and their world-wide sagacity.
A majority of my British co-workers are equally cynical about Blair's super push for joining the Bush regime in waging war. Of the roughly 16 Brits I work with, 12 absolutely detest Blair. They say that Tony Blair knows he will not win another election because of his political treachery against the Labour Party and the common working class. But, they insist, Blair has a bigger prize in mind. He wants to be President of the European Union, and thus second only to the US President in status and power. Considering that 80 percent of the UK population is against the war, Blair's ambitions have to be weighed carefully. Perhaps that is the real purpose of the "old Europe - new Europe" theory being pushed by Rumsfeld. As Bush and company offer money to Turkey and others, just what if anything, have they offered to the "new" Europe and Tony Blair, my British friends ask?
What I believe is that we need to be very cynical of Bush and his cadre of advisors and consorts when it comes to war. The Rovian GOP has already declared its intention to capitalize on the war for purely partisan purposes. War or no war - they will make it work for re-election.
You can almost hear the clacking of keyboards hard at work on books by the teat-sucking media about Bush's FDR-like qualities of leadership and foresight in recognizing the enemy before the rest of the world. Unlike say, WWII. And just in case some miracle blocks the war, Woodward has probably been assigned the job of preparing a tome on the JFK image of Bush in leading the world toward peace and disarmament. Of course, keeping America well armed and out of those pesky ill-advised treaties of the past few decades so it remains Number 1!
The thing is, this White House has laid the groundwork for either war or no war, just to cover its butt. But it is counting on the leaks of attack plans and bombings to psych out Iraq, and should that fail, the heavy evidence offered by the "trustworthy" messenger Powell. The Bush junta hopes that Powell and his personal reputation can turn the American public, not the UN, into supporting the war against Iraq. Is this really how Colin Powell wants to be remembered?
Only through the use of war, can Bush and the GOP retain control of America. Feeding the public a daily dose of fear, a confused citizenry becomes easily cowed into silent obedience. Painting dissent as unpatriotic and treasonous, Bush uses war to erode civil liberties and slip partisan conservatives into the judicial system in order to ensure a long tenure and continued dismantling of anything closely resembling American principles of freedom and choice and accountability. Bush has bought and paid for his judicial branch, his congressional cronies, his corporate media lackeys, and is now moving on to reshape the rest of the world according to what is best for Bush and company.
The coming war has been spindled, twisted, and mutilated to conform to the needs of Bush, not the world, not America, but Bush. An attack on Iraq will do more harm than good. While American-Might could possibly win the battle, it cannot win the war.
Ignoring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to threaten any chance for peace in the Middle East. The fallout from an American takeover in Iraq will only fuel the anti-western movements all over the Middle East and eventually all over the world. Bombings in Kenya, Bali, and elsewhere should serve as ominous warning of the smoldering resentment that will one day erupt as common occurrence everywhere. This is not about freedom-hating people. This is not about the poor railing out at the wealthy powers of world government. This is not about Islam versus Christianity.
This war is about the arrogant Corporate America that views the rest of the world as its own natural resource. Cheap labor, profitable water control, oil development and ownership, and control of financial markets are the driving factors of Bush's agenda. And he is willing to sacrifice whatever you have to accomplish it.
War is a tangled web of unbridled ego, power-mad agendas, and the loss of all sanity. Like all webs, once we are caught within, the struggle to escape is often more dangerous and lethal than the slim silvery threads that attracted us to it in the first place.