now we've been told the truth. TWGSP (The World's Great Super-Power)
must invade Iraq because it has already announced its intention
of deposing (and killing) Saddam Hussein. If TWGSP backs off now,
says former Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Energy and Director
of the CIA, James Schlessinger, the one-person brain trust of TWGSP,
having served both Republican and Democratic presidents, it will
forever lose its credibility. In short, TWGSP will cease to be TWGSP,
leaving that illustrious title to China, which has been lurking
in the wings to assume that coveted title. Is George II going to
give in to the people who wash and iron his shirts? Never.
is wrong with this logic? Even though TPOR (The Paper of Record,
otherwise known as the New York Times,) reports that the
invasion of Iraq will be an economic catastrophe for America (except
for the Carlyle Group) and even though our best friend in the Middle
East, King Abdullah of Jordan, tells us that America is on the verge
of blowing up the entire region and that the Bush hawks "don't
get it," the Cheney-Wolfowitz cabal relentlessly pursues its
goal, failing to consider that a truly great power could adopt a
"flexible objective" without fear of losing its prestige.
argument that TPTB (The Powers That Be) keep reiterating is that
Saddam Hussein is on the verge of creating an atomic bomb. This
is not startling news. Israel has 400 atomic bombs and one hydrogen
bomb, all in the hands of Ariel Sharon, who is, by all accounts,
as insane as Saddam Hussein. We also know that Iran is close to
developing nuclear weapons and that Pakistan and India have loads
of them. Why, then, is Saddam Hussein such a special case, and shouldn't
we consider invading all of these countries?
the not too distant past, Saddam Hussein was our ally; until he
invaded Kuwait because the greedy Al Sabah family demanded he repay
the money they had lent him to prevent an Iranian take-over of the
Middle East. If it is so essential to off Saddam now, why didn't
George I do it when he had the chance?
answer is simple. By not getting rid of Saddam, the U.S. created
a permanent danger to justify the eternal presence of our troops
in Saudi Arabia, so that oil rich country would remain a virtual
colony. In case anyone has forgotten, it was the presence of U.S.
troops (including women) in the Islamic holy land, which contains
both Mecca and Medina, that so incensed Osama bin Laden, he declared
war on the United States. 9/11 was the direct result of that, not
the Palestinian question.
TWGSP to just pull up stakes and high tail it out of Saudi Arabia
would make it look as though Al Queda had won. But be defeating
Saddam Hussein and driving him from power, TWGSP can declare total
victory and relocate its troops to less inflammatory locales in
the Middle East.
Ron Paul of Texas, who is also an eminent physician, has advised
that we should just relocate the troops now and contain Saddam Hussein.
He also has offered us another prescription-constructive neutrality
in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Like many medicines, these
prescriptions will be hard to swallow for TPTB of TWGSP. But why
should the rest of us care? It behooves us to adopt as our motto,
the title of one of Pat Buchanan's books: A
Republic, Not An Empire. Do that, and watch the Dow soar.
him mail] served as Attorney-Advisor for U.S.A.I.D.,
Near East South Asia region and is a member of the Association of
Former Intelligence Officers. A playwright (“Soccer Moms From Hell,”),
he is the author of the forthcoming novel, The Immortalists.