Must Be a Buildup of Wax The first two paragraphs from Sunday's front page: (AP) UNITED NATIONS - Rattled by an outpouring of anti-war sentiment, the United States and Britain began reworking a draft resolution Saturday to authorize force against Saddam Hussein. Diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the final product may be a softer text that does not explicitly call for war. Never mind that the second paragraph isn't a paragraph at all, and isn't even proper grammatically. That's the life of an AP writer. This is significant news in that, for the first time, the media has taken note of the fact that many people, in the United States and in the world, oppose Bush's war in Iraq. There are a variety of reasons for doing so, the least of which (and I mean that in the literal sense) is represented by the photo next to the story, of some jerk named Seema Munir carrying an American flag at a local demonstration – upside down. That's screwy. America isn't going in the wrong direction; the Bush Administration is. So now, anonymous diplomats, Bush representatives, are speaking more softly even as the Pentagon sends 20,000 more troops armed with big sticks to the Persian Gulf. But the political chagrin is palpable. We may even be learning something here, namely that we are not in charge of the entire world. I know it seems like we are, but we aren't. And in this global age everyone somehow got the idea (basically from us) that being engaged in democracy, as opposed to some other form of government, gives them, as free peoples of the world, the right to say something about Bush's war. Now, we may in fact be the world's policeman, but we have taken that burden upon ourselves, just as we have also assumed the role of the world's nursemaid. So, since we now see that we are not the Roman Empire, we may just as well stop giving away money, food, guns and medicine to all these other countries that, in their sublime arrogance, disagree with us. In other words, Pax Americana has come to an end. It didn't have to, but that's the way the Bush family wanted it, so there it is. This is the case whether or not you voted for it, and whether or not you wanted it. If such a process were followed through logically, it would certainly save the American taxpayers quite a bit of cash. So if Africa has to thin itself out by supply and demand, let it be done through disease and starvation. If Israel wants to try to exist in a land where hundreds of millions of fanatical Arabs don't want them, let them have at without our help. And if the end result of our cold shoulder to the world is humanitarian catastrophe abroad and gasoline that costs three dollars a gallon or more at home – it's already two dollars a gallon in L.A. – so be it. Of course, that won't happen, except for the part about the price of gas. We'll remain engaged with the world in whatever ways the various lobbyists can convince our representatives to engage with it. And, as we saw by the bursts of applause from, really, some mighty ungrateful folks around the world at the U.N. on Friday, we've lost the respect that came with winning the Cold War, just as we lost the handle on our economy. And we lost it all on George W. Bush's watch. That's fine if you're only reading about it in an opinion column, but the problem is, you're paying for it. And now you'll be paying for the invasion and occupation of Iraq all by yourself. Tony Blair can't afford to get his people killed in a war that is not backed by a U.N. resolution. The message where that is concerned is pretty clear by now, especially in merry olde London, where three quarters of a million people showed up in opposition last Saturday. And in a parliamentary system, if you're the Prime Minister, and your party calls for a vote of confidence, and you get a vote of none, you find yourself unemployed ... just like that. So our diplomats are walking around wearing the look of a pouty housecat these days, having been rebuffed from the silly idea that they could get what they wanted simply by demanding it. It may have worked in Texas, but when you agree to do business with the other major powers in the world, and they don't agree with your position, you have to either move away from them and go it alone, which promises to be mighty expensive, or you have to do business on negotiated terms. President Bush doesn't like that. It turns out he's a rather rigid fellow, less than flexible when it comes to most anything. I know, saying such things surely makes me a leftist extremist (if so, I'll bet I'm the only leftist extremist with a loaded assault rifle in the closet ... have Poindexter check the NRA rolls and see if I'm right about that). And being in opposition to the partisan ideologues that have narrowly taken control of all branches of government, including the Supreme Court, probably isn't the wisest course of action. But if they're going to shut the opposition down, they'd better do so in a hurry, because they've only got about twenty months before the next election. The way they've disenchanted the average American, and continue to do so every day, bodes no better for Bush's Administration than it ever did for that of any other bad president. Bad presidents historically share one common trait; some would call it a character flaw: They don't know how to listen to what they don't want to hear. Paul Heller 02/17/03 << back to the archives
	All site contents © 2003, Paul F. Heller