www.harlotssauce.com |
Why Does America Think it Has the Right? Peter McCarthy |
Five years after “Mission Accomplished,” I still marvel at how Americans
feel it is their “right” to interfere in the politics of other countries. And not
just Iraq. A number of smaller countries have been subjected to their
interference. It seems that if a politician can drum up a case of national
security, they automatically get the majority of their citizens on side.
How is this possible?
I can’t tell if they think it’s un-American to challenge their leaders, or if
they are simply too lazy to think through the logic. In Australia’s case,
it’s an easy call. We’re lazy. Generally folk can’t be bothered to think
about the problem unless something like the Haneef case comes up,
where lawyers stir up the collective consciousness. Once we feel a
politician has stepped over the line, it’s very easy to get us fired up, but
you need someone to capture the imagination of the public to get the ball
rolling. If it presents as bully boy tactics, then you are home and hosed.
But that doesn’t seem to be the selling point in the United States. It
seems the main objection of U.S. folk to Bush’s War is the death toll of
their own kids, rather than any ethical view or sense of fair play. Fair
enough that they are getting annoyed about the waste of their kids lives,
but I'd like to see them question why they get involved in other countries'
affairs in the first place. Otherwise we will be going through all this
devastation again in another country for another special interest group
under a different President.
Once upon a time we could expect the U.S. media to do the thinking for
their citizens, but I don’t think they are filling that role any more, or at
least they have been very slow to challenge the thinking of this
administration. It reminds me of the disgusting enthusiasm we saw when
Maggie Thatcher decided to improve her poll standings by attacking the
Argentineans in the Falklands. Some of the old blokes with the comment
of “Give 'em a taste of the bayonet,” were quite disgraceful.
The shallow British press was just as bad. Some of their headlines were
shockers. They even went as far as to give highly racist coverage of
tennis matches played by Guillermo Vilas. I couldn’t believe such a thing
from the allegedly sophisticated English commentators. The only saving
grace here was that this was an unusual event for the Brits. Although they
are not without their sins in interfering in other peoples politics, they don’t
seem to get involved quite so often these days.
But the U.S. is a different ball game all together. It seems like they go out
of their way to find a country they feel they can rearrange. Regardless of
the fact they don’t seem to be able to get it even close to what they want.
U.S. fuel prices would seem to indicate that going to Iraq to keep fuel
affordable has been a total disaster.
And I think this highlights a problem with the fuel theory. It looks more
plausible that this is a little earner for Brown and Root. Despite his claims
of concern for U.S. troops, I think Dick Cheney is more than happy with
the whole shooting match. Somehow I don’t see the new "Tricky Dicky"
crying himself to sleep as he counts his ill-gotten gains.
The coming election should be an indicator of how American thinking is
going. If they sign up for more of the same with McCain, then we've a
long way to go before U.S. voters decide to demand more of their
politicians. If they vote Democrat, you won’t be able to tell if they demand
more, or have just got sick of Republicans killing their kids.
What the world really needs is for U.S. voters to simply ask. "Why?" and
demand a sensible answer. Counterproductive missions like 'The War on
Terror' don’t pass the sensible test.
June 2008
feel it is their “right” to interfere in the politics of other countries. And not
just Iraq. A number of smaller countries have been subjected to their
interference. It seems that if a politician can drum up a case of national
security, they automatically get the majority of their citizens on side.
How is this possible?
I can’t tell if they think it’s un-American to challenge their leaders, or if
they are simply too lazy to think through the logic. In Australia’s case,
it’s an easy call. We’re lazy. Generally folk can’t be bothered to think
about the problem unless something like the Haneef case comes up,
where lawyers stir up the collective consciousness. Once we feel a
politician has stepped over the line, it’s very easy to get us fired up, but
you need someone to capture the imagination of the public to get the ball
rolling. If it presents as bully boy tactics, then you are home and hosed.
But that doesn’t seem to be the selling point in the United States. It
seems the main objection of U.S. folk to Bush’s War is the death toll of
their own kids, rather than any ethical view or sense of fair play. Fair
enough that they are getting annoyed about the waste of their kids lives,
but I'd like to see them question why they get involved in other countries'
affairs in the first place. Otherwise we will be going through all this
devastation again in another country for another special interest group
under a different President.
Once upon a time we could expect the U.S. media to do the thinking for
their citizens, but I don’t think they are filling that role any more, or at
least they have been very slow to challenge the thinking of this
administration. It reminds me of the disgusting enthusiasm we saw when
Maggie Thatcher decided to improve her poll standings by attacking the
Argentineans in the Falklands. Some of the old blokes with the comment
of “Give 'em a taste of the bayonet,” were quite disgraceful.
The shallow British press was just as bad. Some of their headlines were
shockers. They even went as far as to give highly racist coverage of
tennis matches played by Guillermo Vilas. I couldn’t believe such a thing
from the allegedly sophisticated English commentators. The only saving
grace here was that this was an unusual event for the Brits. Although they
are not without their sins in interfering in other peoples politics, they don’t
seem to get involved quite so often these days.
But the U.S. is a different ball game all together. It seems like they go out
of their way to find a country they feel they can rearrange. Regardless of
the fact they don’t seem to be able to get it even close to what they want.
U.S. fuel prices would seem to indicate that going to Iraq to keep fuel
affordable has been a total disaster.
And I think this highlights a problem with the fuel theory. It looks more
plausible that this is a little earner for Brown and Root. Despite his claims
of concern for U.S. troops, I think Dick Cheney is more than happy with
the whole shooting match. Somehow I don’t see the new "Tricky Dicky"
crying himself to sleep as he counts his ill-gotten gains.
The coming election should be an indicator of how American thinking is
going. If they sign up for more of the same with McCain, then we've a
long way to go before U.S. voters decide to demand more of their
politicians. If they vote Democrat, you won’t be able to tell if they demand
more, or have just got sick of Republicans killing their kids.
What the world really needs is for U.S. voters to simply ask. "Why?" and
demand a sensible answer. Counterproductive missions like 'The War on
Terror' don’t pass the sensible test.
June 2008
| email this writer with your opinion at: petermccarthy@harlotssauce.com |
| For Newer Articles by McCarthy Click Here |
| For Older Articles by McCarthy Click Here |
