Sunday, July 10, 2005
Terrorism for Dummies
Ok -- this blog is usually noted for its wit and wisdom, but I'm going to dispense with the wit part today and deal with global terrorism and Iraq.
Q: Why are we in Iraq?
A: Two reasons:
1) a stable, pro-Western Iraq could be the keystone of a more permanent, pro-U.S. era in the Middle East.
2) George Bush hated Saddam.
Q: Are there any positive aspects to the Iraqi invasion and subsequent occupation?
A: Definitely. Many Iraquis, given the choice, obviously favor Western-style democracy. Besides the Prime Directive is a concept derived from Star Trek, not international law.
In addition, if you believe that American military personnel in Iraq are more expendable than American civilians in New York City, it was a good idea. After all, it made those soldiers into human lightning rods.
Q: Can we defeat the terrorists?
A: Probably not. It is difficult to intimidate, deter, capture or prosecute adversaries who commit suicide while committing their crimes. I mean, what are you going to do to them? In the meantime, U.S. policy, apparently derived from reruns of "Walker, Texas Ranger", will ensure a steady stream of fresh recruits for the bad guys.
Q: Can we blame the Republicans for this mess?
A: Sure, it's fun -- but it isn't entirely fair. Lyndon Johnson would have done the same thing. We should simply amend the Constitution to bar Texans from the Presidency.
Q: If we simply "cut and run", will that mean that all of those Americans will have died in vain?
A: Yes. Of course, that will not be different from the Americans in Vietnam who died in vain. As a matter of fact, our President recently welcomed the Vietnamese head honcho like he was some kind of hero. The "died in vain" argument apparently only applies to current wars.
You know, it would be good if everyone could stop glorifying death for just a few minutes anyway. Most people die meaningless deaths. A neoplastic cell transformation here, a drunk driver there -- where is the meaning?
The point is not whether we die in vain -- the point is whether we lived in vain. Looking for meaning in death is like seeking evidence of color in a black hole.
Q: Is there any end to the terrorism in sight?
A: Yes, if the avian flu migrates across species. It may occur to people on both sides of this conflict that we are all humans and that the flu is doing a sufficiently good job of killing people without their help.
Q: Is that likely?
A: The flu migration? That's what they say. The realization about shared humanity, etc? Don't bet on it.
Q: Why are we in Iraq?
A: Two reasons:
1) a stable, pro-Western Iraq could be the keystone of a more permanent, pro-U.S. era in the Middle East.
2) George Bush hated Saddam.
Q: Are there any positive aspects to the Iraqi invasion and subsequent occupation?
A: Definitely. Many Iraquis, given the choice, obviously favor Western-style democracy. Besides the Prime Directive is a concept derived from Star Trek, not international law.
In addition, if you believe that American military personnel in Iraq are more expendable than American civilians in New York City, it was a good idea. After all, it made those soldiers into human lightning rods.
Q: Can we defeat the terrorists?
A: Probably not. It is difficult to intimidate, deter, capture or prosecute adversaries who commit suicide while committing their crimes. I mean, what are you going to do to them? In the meantime, U.S. policy, apparently derived from reruns of "Walker, Texas Ranger", will ensure a steady stream of fresh recruits for the bad guys.
Q: Can we blame the Republicans for this mess?
A: Sure, it's fun -- but it isn't entirely fair. Lyndon Johnson would have done the same thing. We should simply amend the Constitution to bar Texans from the Presidency.
Q: If we simply "cut and run", will that mean that all of those Americans will have died in vain?
A: Yes. Of course, that will not be different from the Americans in Vietnam who died in vain. As a matter of fact, our President recently welcomed the Vietnamese head honcho like he was some kind of hero. The "died in vain" argument apparently only applies to current wars.
You know, it would be good if everyone could stop glorifying death for just a few minutes anyway. Most people die meaningless deaths. A neoplastic cell transformation here, a drunk driver there -- where is the meaning?
The point is not whether we die in vain -- the point is whether we lived in vain. Looking for meaning in death is like seeking evidence of color in a black hole.
Q: Is there any end to the terrorism in sight?
A: Yes, if the avian flu migrates across species. It may occur to people on both sides of this conflict that we are all humans and that the flu is doing a sufficiently good job of killing people without their help.
Q: Is that likely?
A: The flu migration? That's what they say. The realization about shared humanity, etc? Don't bet on it.
# posted by Bill @ 12:45 PM 
