Choosing
Sides
by Karen
Kwiatkowski
by Karen Kwiatkowski
When
Clinton was President, many of us in the military, among friends,
openly dismissed his leadership and discredited his policies. When
Bush was (s)elected, many of us breathed a sigh of relief, believing
conservatism would be the order of the day. Neither of those reactions
was valid. We in uniform are supposed to be non-political; we swear
to support the Constitution, not an individual person in the oval
office.
But
if soldiers actually attempt to put the Constitution first, they
find very quickly that good order and discipline is compromised,
and that, not preserving the Constitution, is always the bottom
line. An organized standing federal Army, by its very nature and
politically responsive design, cannot place the Constitution or
law over the wishes of the chief executive.
Guantanamo
and Abu Ghraib, for starters, graphically illustrate this point.
We
have the BushWars raging in Afghanistan and Iraq. No one seems to
know why we are there. Al Qaeda, not Afghanistan, is credited with
the 9-11 attacks, and Saddam had nothing to do with either of them.
Yet whole countries pay while Osama bin Laden remains just out of
reach, and the international waiting list to get into Al Qaeda keeps
growing and growing. Afghanistan and Iraq are probably just business.
You can’t seem to get the truth from Washington, just more deployment
orders and after the fact Congressional mea culpas.
We
have a so-called conservative president who has spent every spare
minute growing a more centralized welfare/warfare state. American
citizens are more dependent on federal rules, regulations and largesse,
in areas from education to agriculture to medicine to insurance
to energy to trade to media, than ever before. One wonders if Bush
is the American Caligula.
Comparing
Bush to Caligula is perhaps too harsh. But the split personality
of a conservative gone socialist, a man of the New Testament waging
war for fantastical storylines because it feels good, a person of
paranoia who insists that public critics be relegated to "Free
Speech Zones" where the media is not allowed, does indeed fit
the Caligula model. If true, it could be good news. Rome only suffered
Caligula for four years.
Perhaps
Lenin is another George Bush model. Lenin expected that Imperialism
would be Capitalism’s highest stage, and clearly George Bush believes
it. Lenin’s actions in 1918 were two-fold. He established "War
Communism" at home to seize property, infuse domestic loyalty,
and strengthen the federal state, along with a "Third International"
to "promote world revolution according to the Russian communist
model."
The
pattern fits. If you consider the philosophies and writings of his
neo-conservative advisors, it
begins to look eerily familiar. Lenin would approve.
We
have Martha Stewart found guilty of lying to the federal government
about
something that was not criminal. She will serve five months
in a federal prison. If I told the federal government a lie, for
example, about how many times I actually weeded my garden this summer,
or that I wrote 10 checks from my checking account instead of 9,
even though none bounced or were otherwise illegal, I too could
get a federal jail sentence. Allow me to clarify. I could get a
jail sentence only if it serves a federal purpose, like Martha
does. I wonder if anyone in Washington is reading LewRockwell.com.
We
have one of the most important national security concerns we have
ever known, the hunt for Bobby Fischer, who is being
extradited to the United States to face federal prosecution for
playing chess in Yugoslavia without United Nations permission.
Huh? Perhaps this is some kind of warning to Bin Laden that we are
serious and are not going to take it anymore!
Back
to the dual personalities of Caligula, Bush is thrilled to be getting
Bobby for violating the United Nations mandate, while Bush himself
has spent inordinate energies in avoiding a similar UN mandate regarding
American participation in and extradition for the UN’s International
Criminal Court. The lesson here is you can violate human rights,
imprison wrongly, and even murder at will, but a game of chess,
well, now you’ve gone too far!
Speaking
of freedom, democracy and murder, the latest reporting on our current
favorite Prime
Minister, Iyad "Little Saddam" Allawi, feature his pistol
shots to the heads of captured Iraqi prisoners. I was concerned,
before this, about Allawi’s newly established domestic intelligence
bureaucracy, to keep Iraqis in line so they can all have a nice
new democracy. I needn’t have worried, and you can bet George W.
Bush isn’t.
What
does it all mean? Like they say, you’re either with us or against
us. I’ve seen enough, and I’ve chosen a side. And while I don’t
support governmental safety laws on principle, like Bette Davis
I must advise all Americans to fasten your seatbelts. It’s going
to be a bumpy night.
July
19, 2004
Karen
Kwiatkowski [send her mail]
is a retired USAF lieutenant colonel, who spent her final four and
a half years in uniform working at the Pentagon. She now lives with
her freedom-loving family in the Shenandoah Valley, and writes a
bi-weekly column on defense issues with a libertarian perspective
for militaryweek.com.
Copyright ©
2004 LewRockwell.com
Karen
Kwiatkowski Archives
|