|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
The Axis of Evil: A Reply |
Current rating: 0 |
by Sam Smith, The Progressive Review
(No verified email address) |
08 Mar 2002
|
|
Sam Smith replies to a reader about Sam's characterization of Bush, bin Laden, and Sharon as the real Axis of Evil. |
ED BARRY - I've been a reader of your newsletter for a long time, and I share a lot of your progressive views. But I have a question about your axis of violence consisting of Bush, Bin Laden, and Sharon. Although Sharon is probably the leader I dislike the most in all of Israel's history, he has absolutely no involvement in this war between the US and Bin Laden's forces. I would understand it if you mentioned Tony Blair as a party to this war, but why Sharon?
You seem to have the same kind of obsession with him that some right-wingers have with Clinton, causing them to see Clinton's hand in almost everything (as Ari Fleisher recently did with his foolish statement). One final thing - although I don't like GW Bush, and don't even consider him the actual president, I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt in his response to the horrendous attack on the US (an attack by a spoiled son of a billionaire that was not motivated, as some people suggest, by poverty).
It's terrible that civilians are being killed by our forces, but didn't the same thing happen during WW II, and wasn't it virtually unavoidable? My question for you is, do you have a better idea as to what the US should have done after being attacked last fall? It's more useful to suggest actual alternatives to what Bush is doing.
Sam Smith replies:
[Sharon is very much a part of the war against whatever it is, and he is using American money to do it. As far as alternatives go, it's a little late drag someone into your hypothesis - after all, the origins of the mess go back at least five decades and not six months, but here are a few things that might have produced better results:
- A whole new cabinet and top level administration, particularly one devoid of small-minded, deeply prejudiced, and violence-prone officials such as now populate the White House, Pentagon, and Department of Justice.
- Treating what happened on September 11 as a crime rather than an act of war. In this case, our efforts could have been directed at dealing with the criminals rather than expanding the empire, building oil pipelines, destroying the constitution, establishing a surveillance state, etc. Using the criminal metaphor would have had the added advantage of reducing the number of suspects and targets from about a billion to a few thousand, something that would have improved our relationships with the Muslim world.
- Obeying international law.
- Adopting the novel premise that Muslims are as entitled to fair and decent treatment as Christians and Jews and that being nice to Israel and the Arab world are not mutually exclusive activities.
- Ending aid to Israel until it stops misusing it so badly.
- Giving as much time and consideration at the White House and on cable TV to "peace experts" as is currently being given to "military experts."
- Not accepting the terrible assumption of the Clinton administration that because it had failed to obtain peace in the Middle East, no one could. The declaration of failure sent a signal to the parties that they could start behaving badly again. The door shutting by Clinton and Bush's subsequent refusal to resume peace efforts were disastrous mistakes.
- Forget the nonsense about not being able to negotiate until there is an end to violence or not being able to negotiate with one's enemies. This oft repeated bromide is the same as saying that you're not going to negotiate at all, because if there were no violence and no enemies you wouldn't need negotiations.
- Deal far more fairly with the most rational people in the Muslim world, which will have the effect of giving the most irrational people far less to kill themselves and others about.
- Support Palestinian statehood.
- End the embargo against Iraq which is killing about the same number of innocent civilians every month as were killed during the World Trade Center attack or during our invasion of Afghanistan.
- Follow the lead of Charles DeGualle, who after assuming power in the wake of Dien Bien Phu, proceeded to dismantle the French empire. The attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were our Dien Bien Phu because they showed that a motley rabble of guerillas could destroy or badly damage the primary economic and military icons of the greatest power on earth. When that happens you don't have much of an empire left, anyway.
- Use this time of crisis to show others and ourselves the true values of American democracy and its constitution rather than doing everything possible to undermine and destroy them. - SAM ]
|
See also:
http://prorev.com/indexa.htm
|
