World Affairs: August 2002 Archives

"Foreign diplomats say Powell represents what many people in the world think America should be -- open and generous with the world, and with an ear to other points of view. The secretary looks all the better, they add, because the United States under Mr. Bush appears determined to hew its own path in the world, whether it's about greenhouse gases, the International Criminal Court, or now Iraq.

"Powell is the international community's great white hope," says a Pakistani diplomat, grinning at his own irony."

Powell is my only hope in the mess that is this administration.  I can only hope Bush starts listening to him soon.

"US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld compared the White House's policy of seeking the removal of the Iraqi leader with Winston Churchill's warnings about Adolf Hitler before the Second World War."

Hmmm....something tells me the situation is a little different.

"Welcome to America with a "wanton boy" president, the kind of person who thinks he can get away with anything. Well, George, don't "misunderestimate" the character and strength of the American people. Don't pee on our leg and try to tell us it's raining. It won't work because Studs Terkel is right. There is a silent majority and millions proudly belong!"

Sign me up!

"I was dubious at first. But now I think Dick Cheney has it right.

Making the case for going to war in the Middle East to veterans on Monday, the vice president said that "our goal would be . . . a government that is democratic and pluralistic, a nation where the human rights of every ethnic and religious group are recognized and protected."

O.K., I'm on board. Let's declare war on Saudi Arabia! Let's do "regime change" in a kingdom that gives medieval a bad name."

How is it that we can justify attacking Iraq, but not Saudi?

"Iran's president, Mohammad Khatami, said today that hard-line clerics had made it all but impossible for him to do his job and that he would propose legislation to adjust the balance of power so that he could pursue reforms."

This is an encouraging sign.  I had given up on Khatami after his initial attempts at reform petered out.  Maybe this is a message to the US?

"Secondly, politics can be integrated into other community activities. Although I am a jew, I have a mixed marriage, and my wife and I have brought up our kids as jewish at home, and in the local Unitarian church in our community. I like our neighborhood church very much, because within the 200 to 300 families who are part of that community, there is solid support for activism. For example, one of the main focus areas of the national UU church this year is defending civil liberties. This means that my participation in the church is supportive, not outside of, political activism."

And this why UU's rule.  My parents, both raised Baptist chose to raise my sister and I in this slightly more progressive church.  I'm very grateful to them for this.  However, I am a bit disturbed (or more accurately, confused) over the church's reaction to 9/11.   I suppose it is difficult to find "The inherent worth and dignity of every person" in a world this messed up, but I guess thats the challenge.  I like to think of it as a thinking person's religion.  And if it weren't for UUism, who knows, we might not have had a Web to browse.

It has become synonymous with the terrorist attacks of September 11 - but what is the origin of the name al-Qaida? Giles Foden on how Bin Laden may have been inspired by Isaac Asimov's Foundation

Weird...

"Zinni made a direct reference to the secretary of state, along with retired generals Schwarzkopf and Scowcroft, and derided the armchair hawks who are promoting "pre-emptive" military action: "It's pretty interesting that all the generals see it the same way, and all the others who have never fired a shot and are hot to go to war see it another way." If I were Dick Cheney or Richard Perle or Paul Wolfowitz, I might have to take that personally. "

When your Special Envoy to the Middle East is telling you its a bad idea, you'd think someone would listen.

"Lawyers for President Bush have concluded he can launch an attack on Iraq without new approval from Congress, in part because they say that permission remains in force from the 1991 resolution giving Bush's father authority to wage war in the Persian Gulf, according to administration officials."

Phew!  Thank god George the II has George the I to back him up!  The People don't know whats best for them anyhow.

"The Pentagon is now debating whether Saudi Arabia is our enemy. Yes and no. There is a secularized, U.S.-educated, pro-American elite and middle class in Saudi Arabia, who are not America's enemies. They are good people, and you can't visit Saudi Arabia without meeting them. We should never forget that.

But the Saudi ruling family stays in power not by a democratic vote from these progressives. It stays in power through a bargain with the conservative Wahhabi Muslim religious establishment. The Wahhabi clerics bless the regime and give it legitimacy -- in the absence of any democratic elections. In return, the regime gives the Wahhabis oil money, which they use to propagate a puritanical version of Islam that is hostile to the West, to women, to modernity and to all non-Muslim faiths."

A good op-ed in the NY Times by Thomas Friedman, one of my favorite authors, about the power of oil vs freedom.

On Dateline NBC tonight John Hockenberry interviewed Prince Turki al-Faisal al-Saud about the topics mentioned in my earlier posting on Saudi financing of al-Queda.  Predictably, he denies it.  The report also delves into the US's blindness when it comes to Saudi Arabia.  American intelligence organizations collect no intelligence on Saudi, to avoid "annoying the royal family".  Hopefully this indicates more of the mainstream media will be turning their eye to our relationship with Saudi, and how it may have led to the 9/11 attacks.

"Turki knew Bin Laden well, not just through family connections but because in the early 1980s he had hand-picked the young Saudi to organise Arab volunteers fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.

According to the documents, the agreement stated Bin Laden would not use his forces in Afghanistan to subvert the Saudi government. In return, the Saudis agreed to ensure that requests for the extradition of Al-Qaeda members and demands to close Afghan training camps by third countries were not carried out.

To reinforce the deal, the Saudis agreed to provide oil and financial assistance to both the Taliban and to Pakistan. The documents detail donations totalling several hundred millions of dollars. "

Oops.  So now what?  Now that there's all sorts of evidence supporting the fact that the House of Saud was one of the principle financiers behind al-Queda, and basically none showing Iraq is responsible, do we invade Saudi Arabia?

"Making the "Just War" argument for Iraq (Op-Ed) By wrinkledshirt Fri Aug 23rd, 2002 at 05:38:52 AM EST

The "Just War" argument is a special branch of military philosophy and ethics geared towards determining whether or not it is justifiable for one nation to declare war upon another. There are five criteria that need to be fulfilled, and this article will explore each of these five criteria in an attempt to see how they apply to the impending war against Iraq. "

TrueMajority was founded by Ben Cohen, Co-founder, Ben and Jerry’s. It is a grassroots education and advocacy project of Priorities, Inc., a non-profit, non-partisan, tax-deductible, 501(c)(3) corporation.

Once you register, you can go to our "Take Action" section and send faxes on on the issues we all care about to members of Congress and national leaders. The "10 principles" outlines our philosophy.
After you register we will also send you e-mail alerts on critical issues. With one click of a button you can either send our suggested faxes or edit them yourself (and we'll still send them for you.) You are always free not to participate in any specific issue or remove your name from our list.

"At this writing, the American military response to 11 September has been confined to the war in Afghanistan. It may be too early to look at "lessons learned", but it is not too early for an assessment of whether or not we have been successful fighting Fourth Generation Warfare (4GW) as operations unfold in Afghanistan against the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Further, it is not too early to adjust our tactics, techniques, and even the â01CAmerican Way of Warâ01D to combat an illusive, determined, and deadly enemy that operates outside the framework of the nation-state."

An interesting writeup on Fourth Generation Warfare and how our Second Generation war infrastructure is adapting.  The conclusion is that while Special Operations seems to have the right idea, the leadership, and the defense infrastructure as a whole is not ready for this type of war.  In addition, it briefly touches on the need to convince the enemy of the immorality of terrorism, and to right some of the perceived wrongs the enemy holds against us.  The article is a few months old, but I thought it presented some interesting points, particulary when measuring the current Isreali/Palestinian conflict.  The current mess in the Holy Land would seem to demonstrate the inevitable folly of trying to fight a Fourth Generation opponent with Second Generation tools and tactics.