"Smitty" writes to Vanity Fair about his observations of the President's work ethic in the aftermath of 9/11.
Showing posts with label 9/11. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 9/11. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Tougher Than Hell
So I was watching the Daily Show the other day and caught an interesting interview with Fareed Zakaria, who writes for Newsweek. He'll also soon have a show on CNN. He's an interesting character politically. Some might say that he comes from a neoconservative background. He's a big supporter of free trade and globalization. Well, anyways, you can wikipedia him. Whether or not you disagree with some of the underlying ideological assumptions, he is incredibly learned and has a fascinating perspective.
Here, he discusses the decline of the United States as the world's sole economic superpower. Generally, Zakaria tends to paint a rosier picture of our overall outlook than that which seems to be depicted on the television but his characterization of our power sent chills down my spine.
We have the biggest military in the world, by far. One of the things I think has happened . . . is that we look at every problem now really through the prism of the military because we're so damn good at it. So you look at what's going on in Africa and you say 'there's Islamic extremism there.' So we say 'well, let's set up Africom. You know, a command center, US military, four-star general.'
Wait a minute, is the answer to the spread, the rise of Islamic fanaticism to set up a kind of US neocolonial military presence in these countries and start having American troops go around there beating people up? I'm not so sure.
*Note, Jon sort of gives the rub to Tulane University at the end of the interview
The biggest military in the world. Every problem through the prism of the military. A neocolonial military presence.
And Mr. Zakaria should know, because he was at least one meeting with Paul Wolfowitz in November of 2001.
Another person who should know is former Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, who since leaving his post as commander of the coalition troops in Iraq, has roasted the Bush administration's reckless consideration of American and civilian lives and their constant nods to political considerations over military objectives:
Kick ass. If someone tries to stop the march to democracy we will seek them out and kill them. That's the mindset. Real classy. Never mind the fact that the President withdrew the orders because he thought it might hurt his reelection campaign.Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez joined the White House videoconference on the second day of house-to-house fighting between 2,000 Marines and entrenched guerrillas in Fallujah.
Crafted in Washington as a brass-knuckles response to the gruesome deaths of four Blackwater security guards killed the week before and strung up on a bridge, the battle had the full support of President Bush.
Sanchez, in a memoir to be released Tuesday, said Bush “launched into what I considered a kind of confused pep talk” about the battle for Fallujah and an upcoming campaign to kill or capture radical anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and cripple his militia.
“Kick ass!” Bush said. “If somebody tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them! We must be tougher than hell!”
Fueled by images beamed by the Al-Jazeera television network, the administration quickly reversed course, stopping Operation Vigilant Resolve. Soon after, Coalition Provisional Authority administrator L. Paul Bremer dropped plans to capture or kill al-Sadr, even though the president had said during the April 7, 2003, meeting, “It is essential he be wiped out,” according to the memoir.
Meanwhile, let us travel to the present, to Red Square in Moscow, where new Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and new Russian President Vladmir Putin put on a display of military might not seen since the days of the USSR.
The Kremlin’s decision to parade its military hardware has been a subject of competing interpretations, viewed variously as symbolic confirmation of Russia’s pride, or aggressiveness, as a marketing show of Russian arms, and as a nationalistic festival ordered by Mr. Putin, for Mr. Putin.
Mr. Putin insisted earlier in the week that the parade should not be viewed as “saber rattling.” “It is not a warlike gesture,” he said. “Russia is not threatening anyone.”
But it followed a year during which the Kremlin asserted its case against what it regarded as reckless American foreign policies. Mr. Putin has strongly protested an American-led plan to install a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. As tensions rose, Russia’s aging strategic bombers conducted international patrols, entered British airspace and approached American carrier groups on the high seas.
The United States' response?
Let's just speculate for a moment before I share it with you.
Remember, President Bush was very close with President Putin, he explained that he trusted Mr. Putin not to entrench himself as an autocrat because he "looked the man in the eyes" and was able "to get a sense of the man's soul." So, though Bush likely doesn't appreciate Russia's opposition to the missile defense project or Russia's incursions into former Soviet republic elections, President Bush probably doesn't want to aggravate Russia further. The administration will probably want to through a wet blanket on media attempts to fan flames. The President's policy toward Mr. Putin already looks abominable, might as well minimize damage, play off the significance of the military demonstration by talking up US-Russian friendship.
Well, here is the US reaction:
“If they wish to take out their old equipment and take it for a spin and check it out,” said the spokesman, Geoff Morrell, “they’re more than welcome to do so.”WOW!
So the official United States reaction to Soviet-style military escalation by the Russians is to backhand them in the face, insult their might, and challenge them to spend more money on their military.
You know, the Bush administration, for years, has insisted that we all have to adopt "a post-9/11 mindset." Reliance on diplomacy and the United Nations was naive in the face of the dangerous new world landscape. The United States needed to act more unilaterally to protect its interests, the argument was.
But, you know what, you know who never adopted a post-9/11 mindset?
The Bush administration.
Because they're still very clearly living in the midst of the Cold War.
We've dictated a foreign policy marinated in the same juices as the Domino Theory. If we can just use our guns and our planes to carve out spheres of influence in the Middle East, the terrorists and the unfriendly states will topple over in turn.
On the count of three, arms race: one.... two.....
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
September Whatever
I was sad that day. So were my friends and my family. And so was everyone else I saw on the street whether were able to make eye contact or could only stare at the ground.
Also there was unity and togetherness and community. I remember sitting on my front stoop with my neighbors and a candle. I remember a Philadelphia Flyers exhibition was called off halfway through because the crowd was chanting to see the President's speech on the big screen instead of the game for which they bought tickets.
But now?
I don't care about September 11th anymore. I'm cynical. I observe no moment of silence.
Our government vowed to make them pay. Our government vowed to make us safe.
Yet here we are six years later. Are the revenge-seekers placated? Have they paid? There is not even a clear answer to the question of who it is we are seeking to exact revenge upon. I thought that this attack was perpetrated by Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization. By proxy, that meant the Taliban regime of Afghanistan that encouraged his operation.
Yet, we are told that bin Laden's al-Qaeda has regained strength.
And every time it is possible, there is an administration official or supporter telling us that while we are safer, "we are not yet safe." For example:
The Democrats, for their part, can't decide to say if we're safer or not.
I do know that we are at war with Iraq, which had NO NO NO connection to the attacks of six years ago.
But we are not yet safe.
I do know that our nation's image has suffered abroad and that we garner little of the sympathy we did six years ago.
But we are not yet safe.
Yet, still, the war in Iraq is justified as part of the global war on terror.
Is it part of the global war on terror simply because we happen to have troops there?
Other terrible things are tools in the global war on terror too.
But we are not yet safe.
Over 70,000 civilian deaths in Iraq, not including those related to sectarian strife and declines in quality of life.
Over 3,700 dead coalition troops.
Over $450 billion of taxpayer money spent.
But we are not yet safe.
A nation deeply polarized politically.
A nation that doesn't trust its government.
But we are not yet safe.
So today is September Whatever, 2007. We are not yet safe. The crazies that crashed planes on purpose are still to blame for those terrible events.
They are already dead.
So who is really paying for it?
The US troops, Iraqi civilians, and the common taxpayers paying for the war on terror don't even get to be famous. We gave all that fame to bin Laden and groups of irrational fanatics all over the world. They're not hot. They can't sing and they can't dance. But boy do we do a great job getting their brand out there for them. They don't even have their own show but we can't stop talking about them about how scary and evil and threatening they are.
I'll tell you what, I'm not scared or threatened. I don't even think they're evil, I think they're irrational. And they're wasting my time.
In fact, I'm ready to stop talking about them. What if we said that they couldn't be famous anymore and our media outlets and elected officials stopped talking about them like they were celebrities all of the time? What if we stopped spending all this money on them and spent it on ourselves for once?
We sure could use some of that fame and fortune down here in New Orleans.
Mr. President, can we have some hospitals?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
